Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by josteink | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

josteink

> but as a Linux programmer, I found it difficult to install the dotnet sdk without the root permission

It’s a tarball. Unpack it wherever you like.

What exact problems did you have?

Edit: I’ve even “installed” the .NET SDK on ARM/Aarch64 devices this way. Zero issues.

View on HN

The lack of the ICU library. As you mention it, I searched around and found setting "export DOTNET_SYSTEM_GLOBALIZATION_INVARIANT=true" could solve the problem. I stand corrected. Nonetheless, adding an env variable is still an extra step especially when the dotnet cli doesn't tell you what to do. An enduser has to google around to find the answer.

>An enduser has to google around to find the answer.

Welcome to Linux?? Not to be sarcastic but if you want your hand held install Windows for your .Net development. It's pretty nice over there.

> Welcome to Linux??

Maybe more like, "Welcome to MS tools on Linux?" There are no similar issues with installing a JDK, for example.

The OP is complaining about needing root to satisfy som third-party library dependency (libicu) when installing the .NET SDK outside the system package-manager, with the tarball only.

I think that’s a pretty far fetched complaint. There are tons of software out there on Linux which will break if you don’t satisfy their dependencies.

I’m sure the OpenJDK-tarball has some system-wide dependencies too (libssl?), but you can’t tell that because you probably installed it as root, using a package-manager instead.

If you do the same with the .NET SDK (use root, install via package-manager) you will find everything working equally smooth.

Have you installed jdk before? I installed jdk quite a few times without root and never had a problem. Jdk only depends on essential system libraries like libc. It ships other necessary libraries in the tar-ball. Do you have a reference to your claim that Java requires libssl?

> I installed jdk quite a few times without root and never had a problem. Jdk only depends on essential system libraries like libc.

The Ubuntu repos suggests there are more dependencies than just plain libc.

https://packages.ubuntu.com/hirsute/openjdk-11-jre

Could it be you have those dependencies satisfied through other things you’ve already installed?

> Do you have a reference to your claim that Java requires libssl?

None at all. It was an example of something I found it reasonable it might depend on, since .NET also depends on that on Linux :)

The package manager provided distributions tend to have different dependencies than the tarballs from Oracle.

I generally do install JDKs as root from the system's package manager. This is primarily due to the system integration that it provides.

However, I often keep a collection of older versions and different patch levels in my home directory. These work fine for testing with the non-openjdk distributions for compatibility purposes.

I wasn't familiar with the icu library issue, so maybe it is something straightforward, but it seems odd that the fix was an env var. I certainly wouldn't say something like "welcome to linux" because of a scenario like this.

> I often keep a collection of older versions and different patch levels in my home directory.

And they are obviously going to work because you’ve satisfied all the main OpenJDK dependencies through the install with your package-manager.

If you repeat your own scenario with the .NET SDK instead, you will have the exact same experience.

That's actually not true. They'd work even if I removed the main one.

Its how I did it before the distribution packaged OpenJDK, which really wasn't that long ago.

An "end user" will not install the SDK anyway. You do not need it to run .NET, it's for making your own apps.

An end user of an SDK is a developer that uses the SDK

Reply on news.ycombinator.com