Arch Linux

luceph

Member

From: Ontario, Canada

Registered: 2017-05-06

Posts: 27

[SOLVED]Packages w/ -bin affix vs. Regular Packages

Hi, I did some searching, but I couldn't find any answers. For example, a package from the AUR, palemoon, also has a similar package available, palemoon-bin. They are both the same version, yet the bin version has 139 against 98 for the non-bin package. So I assume there's an advantage for some people to use the -bin version, as otherwise, the most standard package in the AUR usually massively outnumbers the variations in votes.

Thanks.

Last edited by luceph (2017-05-15 20:24:19)

WorMzy

Forum Moderator

From: Scotland

Registered: 2010-06-16

Posts: 11,863

Website

Re: [SOLVED]Packages w/ -bin affix vs. Regular Packages

bin = binary. It means it's a precompiled application, provided by upstream or a third-party. If you don't want to compile the application yourself, then a -bin package will give you the application with none of the compilation.

---

Sakura:-
Mobo: MSI MAG X570S TORPEDO MAX // Processor: AMD Ryzen 9 5950X @4.9GHz // GFX: AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT // RAM: 32GB (4x 8GB) Corsair DDR4 (@ 3000MHz) // Storage: 1x 3TB HDD, 6x 1TB SSD, 2x 120GB SSD, 1x 275GB M2 SSD

Making lemonade from lemons since 2015.

jasonwryan

Anarchist

From: .nz

Registered: 2009-05-09

Posts: 30,424

Website

Re: [SOLVED]Packages w/ -bin affix vs. Regular Packages

...and none of the makedepends.

---

Arch + dwm   •   Mercurial repos  •   Surfraw

Registered Linux User #482438

luceph

Member

From: Ontario, Canada

Registered: 2017-05-06

Posts: 27

Re: [SOLVED]Packages w/ -bin affix vs. Regular Packages

Perfect, thanks. So if the depencies are installed then prior to installing the bin version, is it the exact same thing? Or would it always be better to have it get compiled? And jw, If a package was to be installed with a depency missing, would it simply be missing the functionality of it (seems obvious, but never needed to do this, curious if it could break things worse-case)?

Slithery

Administrator

From: Norfolk, UK

Registered: 2013-12-01

Posts: 5,776

Re: [SOLVED]Packages w/ -bin affix vs. Regular Packages

IMHO it's always better to compile the software yourself. The only reasons I would contemplate running a -bin package are...

• It's the only version available - For example proprietary software where the source isn't available.

• The software would take more time/resources to compile than I have available.

And jw, If a package was to be installed with a depency missing, would it simply be missing the functionality of it (seems obvious, but never needed to do this, curious if it could break things worse-case)?

It's impossible to install a package without its runtime dependencies. Optional dependencies are just that - optional, but installing them will provide extra functionality. However, jasonwrayn was referring to makedepends, these are only needed to compile the software - They are irrelevant once you have a compiled binary.

---

No, it didn't "fix" anything. It just shifted the brokeness one space to the right. - jasonwryan
Closing -- for deletion; Banning -- for muppetry. - jasonwryan

aur - dotfiles

luceph

Member

From: Ontario, Canada

Registered: 2017-05-06

Posts: 27

Re: [SOLVED]Packages w/ -bin affix vs. Regular Packages

Great, thanks for the answers.