I’ve just downloaded Acroreader 9.1 from Adobe HP and want to install it on Suse 11.0.
There is no previous Acroreader installation on my computer.
I know, that I could install Acroreader from rpm-package with Yast, however this is then version 8.1.
Is it possible or recommended to install a naked binary and how does this work?
Or is it better to install the 8.1 - package and to update it with a new binary file?
After working 2 months with Linux, I’m still a newbie, but I already know what a command line or a shell is
Is there a reason you need 9.1 and cannot use 8.1? If you use the standard package from the openSUSE repositories you will get security updates to it. If you install an Adobe package you have to check for updates from Adobe yourself. And as far as I can see acroread is has more holes than cheese; they keep finding new ones.
I’m using KDE 3.0, including KPDF. I’m just used to Acroreader from my previous Windows PC, so just wanted to see, whether I can also use it under Linux.
Version 8.1 of course would do also, I’m just curious, how to install executable files under Linux as you often can download latest releases for Linux from provider hompages (such as the 9.1 acroreader version or also Firefox f.e.), but not as rpm-package.
Tried the ‘chmod +X’ - command, but still permission is denied.
Will install the 8.1 package now, but I’m still interested, how to install software under Linux manualy.
Some more questions here: is the binary file the equivalent to the executable in windows? And where are the application binaries/executables usually saved in Linux?
Yes and no. Your best bet is not to compare it to Windows. Windows puts the same extension on it’s packages as it does it’s executable files. You can find Linux executable files in either /bin, /sbin, or /usr/bin or /usr/sbin. There may be a couple other places, but for the most part, that’s it. When you look in those places, you will see the executables as just file names. For example, amarok.
Now when asking someone to help you, it is generally courteous if you provide all the information. ‘Can not execute binary file’ tells me a few things. One, you successfully changed permissions to make it executable. Two, it also would see that you are in the wrong directory, or don’t have adequate permissions.
If you downloaded the binary file via your browser, it will save to the location you have in ‘Preferences’. For example, mine saves to my ‘Desktop’ (/home/dean/Desktop). Hence, as Johnathan has explained to you, you have to execute the command with full path, or be in same directory where file was downloaded.
Yes, I’m fully aware, that sufficient information is fundamental to be able to give remote support and I’m absolutely willing to provide. But what are the fundamentals in Linux? Specifically when using the shell. I’m comming from the Windows world and the differences are significant. There is nothing in Windows comparable to the shell in Linux.
So, I hope for some indulgency.
When trying to execute the binary, I’m first changed to the directory, where the binary file is located (right?). Then input the ‘chmod’ - command and then the sh <filename> - command. Then received the error message ‘Can not execute binary file’. Not more. Sorry.
When trying to execute the binary, I’m first changed to the directory, where the binary file is located (right?). Then input the ‘chmod’ - command and then the sh <filename> - command. Then received the error message ‘Can not execute binary file’. Not more. Sorry.
I take it you tried running it as root. Open a terminal, and type su and then root pwd when asked.
Change to the directory with the adobe binary file and try:
sh ./Adobe…
It should install.
I use both version 8 from suse and v9 from adobe and prefer v8 if it’s any help.
