[NBLUG/talk] What kind of file is "...-rpm.bin"?

[ME]

Todd Cary said:
> Mike -
>
> It created an installer and did it's job of installing the JRE in the
> /opt/ directory.  Now, I believe, I have to create the symbolic link for
> the browser - correct?

The symlink(s) may have been made for you (rpm often do extra stuff for
you, it depends upon who built the RPM), but if it/they have not, then you
will want to make one/them. The "Readme" or "docs" that come with that RPM
should give you two choices for how to create the symlinks. (One method
makes the JRE available for each user who has included the link in their
home dir's browser config space, and the other is a system-wide link in
the systems browser config space. Where your system's browser config space
is located can be different per distro

(Each browser will likely need its own sym-link in its own plugin folder.)

In your system (maybe /opt ?) there should be a dir "j2re???????" that
will have a plugin folder/dir andin that folder an i386 (assuming you are
on x86)  and in that will likely be 3 other folders (different browser
plugins.) If you want to install it in just one user's account, then you
cd ln -s the plugin that is for the browser you want to use from your home
directory's browser's plugin folder. (It would be a good idea to verify
that you do not allready have such a link.) You will need to quit and
restart your browser dfor the plugin to be recognized. In the case of
Mozilla, I think that you may need to then visit the preferences and tell
it that you want to use the j2re.

To install it for all system users of the browser, there should be a
system-wide browser plugin dir somewhere.You can always try to do
something like:
$ locate plugin | less
and then look through the list of found files until you find one that uas
your browser name as part of the path, and is in a system location (like
/usr/lib/mozilla/plugins) and then follow the same procedure for making a
symlink.

> Also, why didn't "sh [the file name]" not work, after setting the
> "execute" bit, but just running it with "./[file name] " did work?

Well, I cannot say for sure because I can't see your system, the output
and the results, but you can do "sh ./file" when the "./file" is a
collection of shell command, or a shell-parseable file. In the case of a
compiled executable, I think that "sh" will find difficulty in trying to
parse the binary data, as it cannot "interprit" the binary for execution.

When you make the downloaded file executable (chmod 755 ./file) then you
try to run the file (./file) if the file is indeed a shell script, it will
likely have the #!/bin/bash or #!/bin/sh as part of the header and then it
will work. If it does not have that , but it is a list of shell commands,
then whatever shell you are using (well, most shells would do this) will
try to execute the command. Additionally, if the ./file is an 8-bit binary
file, you may then be able to execute it.

Files that end in ".bin" that are build for Linux systems are often
shell-parsable data, and use of sh ./filename usually works. However, if
the file is a binary file, this can fail. (There are also ".bin" files for
MacOS systems used to specify MacBinary as an encoding system for Macs to
ensure the data fork and resource force can be contained in a single file
and passed through mailers and downloaded from ftp/web sites. NOTE:not all
files ending in ".bin" are for Linux systems. ;-)

> P.S. Again, I want to express my appreciation for the time and detail
> you put into your replies!

You're welcome. :-)