← Back to team overview

kicad-developers team mailing list archive

Re: OSX Installer debate


On Sep 13, 2010, at 15:20 PM, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:

> On 09/13/2010 08:53 AM, Martijn Kuipers wrote:
>> How do we want the OSX packages to look like (installer) ?
>> At the moment we have a DMG-generated from scripts and one generated with CPack (I patched my CMakeList.txt with the patch from Jerry floating around on the list).
>> Neither are satisfactory, in my opinion.
>> Let me explain:
>> If we add docs and libraries to the DMG file, then it is no longer Drag&Drop. 
>> Normally you drag the application (on our case the Kicad folder with all applications) to the Applications link, which are both shown by the installer in the finder. However, if we also include libraries in the DMG, then these need to be installed in /Library/Application Support/kicad or in $HOME/Library/Application Support/kicad (according to Marco). We don't want the user to drag them into the applications.
>> I see 2 posible solutions:
>> 1. Use packagemanager, which allows more complex installs. Disadvantage is that you have no clue what is installed where and since there is no uninstall I think it's rather messy.
>> 2. Split the libraries and applications in separate DMGs. I personally like this option, since it allows you to easily update either Kicad or the Libraries. Not sure what to do with docs. Can we put them in a sub-folder in the Kicad folder under applications? Same with scripts ?
>> I would love to hear your opinions on this. 
>> /Martijn
> There are two classes of users:
> 1) those that install from a pre-built package.
> 2) those that install by building the source themselves.
> In the linux world there is a package manager person for each distro,
> and he is responsible for users in class 1) on his distro.
> So I actually think you should be talking to those people for that
> category of user.

Sure. For Kicad who is the OSX package manager? I hope (s)he is reading this list. As for Linux, I think Kicad ought to provide a static-version (should fit most distros). Of course, if someone wants to add deb, rpm, etc., then that is fine with me, it is just more work because of the version dependancies between the different components. Wrapping a static-package inside deb or rpm is not a good solution (my personal opinion).

> For category 2) users, I see no reason why cmake and/or one of its
> sibling programs cannot be used.  This makes it easier for those of use
> that do not use OSx to stay in the conversation.
I don't object to cmake at all. I think the DMG is not as nice as it could be, but I have not spend much time looking at all the options CPack gives you.

If there is an area where Win/Linux/OSX can be different, it is in the installers. And my questions were solely related to the OSX installer, where I don't think the split I mentioned is so different from what we have now.  I don't think there are libraries included in the kicad source, they are in kicad-lib-committers/kicad/library. 

My suggestion would be to create 2 installers;
- Kicad application
- Libraries (with Libraries I mean eeschema components, footprints, packages3d and modules). The name is confusing, but I did not mean things like wxWidgets, Boost, etc.

I am a "User 1" type, if I can find a recent enough version, otherwise I am "User 2". But even as "User 2" I prefer to create packages and then install those. 


Follow ups