kicad-developers team mailing list archive
Mailing list archive
Re: PPA version details
On 1/2/2013 4:55 PM, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
> On 1/2/2013 3:25 PM, Adam Wolf wrote:
>> I think I was pointed that way previously, the last time I tried to fix
>> this. I believe the cmake files are regenerated each time at the
>> launchpad build servers--without any caching. However, the proof's in
>> the pudding!
> You are correct. I just looked at one of your PPA build logs and sure
> enough each build creates its own pristine architecture specific build
> environment, exports the source from the KiCad repo using bzr, runs
> CMake to generate the makefiles, and runs make to build the source.
> It's obvious from the log file that bzr is not found when CMake is run.
> Neither is doxygen should you ever want to include the developer help
> files as separate documentation package. Now that you've added bzr to
> the debian build dependencies it should be fixed on the next build cycle.
> You can safely remove the -DKICAD_MINIZIP=0 definition from the
> configure section of the debian/rules file. Minizip is no longer part
> of the project source.
I also noticed that boost-dev is a still a build dependency in the
debian/control file. You can remove that as well since the KiCad source
already includes the Boost files required to build KiCad.
> Thanks for your efforts in providing up to date KiCad packages.
>> Thanks Wayne.
>> Adam Wolf
>> Wayne and Layne, LLC
>> On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> <mailto:stambaughw@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>> On 1/2/2013 3:04 PM, Adam Wolf wrote:
>> > I'm not certain that my PPA currently works--as far as I can tell, it
>> > has the wrong date. I've tinkered around trying to solve this a few
>> > times in the past, and finally tracked it down to a missing
>> > build-dependency of bzr. They're installed on my local machine, of
>> > course, but not on the remote launchpad build servers (unless you
>> > declare them.)
>> > I added them to my packaging repo and pushed it today, so in the next
>> > day or os the PPA will pick it up.
>> > General request to everyone: In the next few weeks, I'm cleaning
>> up the
>> > PPA packaging code to be in line with Debian/Ubuntu policy. If
>> you know
>> > of something you want tweaked with the PPA, now's a great time to ask.
>> I'm not sure if you are aware of it but please note that the version
>> header file only gets generated when CMake is run. So unless one of the
>> project CMake files changes, the version header file does not get
>> regenerated. You need to call 'make rebuild_cache' in to regenerated
>> the version header file.
>> > Adam Wolf
>> > Wayne and Layne, LLC
>> > On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Vesa Solonen
>> <vesa.solonen@xxxxxxxx <mailto:vesa.solonen@xxxxxxxx>
>> > <mailto:vesa.solonen@xxxxxxxx <mailto:vesa.solonen@xxxxxxxx>>> wrote:
>> > 02.01.2013 16:31, Adam Wolf kirjoitti:
>> > > Hi Solonen,
>> > >
>> > > There previously was a bug in my packaging that caused the wrong
>> > date to be
>> > > pulled in to the build version information. I had fixed it a
>> > while ago,
>> > > but I will see if there is a regression.
>> > Thanks for a prompt response. It's great that you are taking
>> care of the
>> > PPA. At home I'm compiling my own, but elsewhere the PPA does
>> the trick.
>> > IMHO a date information is not really needed, just BZR
>> revision number.
>> > That's the only unambiguous way.
>> > -Vesa