kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Adam Wolf <adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dick,

Do you see any value in me trying to get a decent package put into the
Ubuntu and Debian release or should I abandon that project?

Adam Wolf
W&L
On Oct 18, 2013 8:33 AM, "Dick Hollenbeck" <dick@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 10/18/2013 03:11 AM, Fabrizio Tappero wrote:
> > Hello,
> > I updated the script according to Dick's suggestion and added some
> > modifications in it for "yum" people so that we are now a bigger
> > family. I also uploaded it to the web:
> > http://www.kicad-pcb.org/display/KICAD/Download
> >
> > just a question, Dick, why don't we like "sudo apt-get build-dep
> > kicad"? you removed it. Shouldn't be better to have it there? just in
> > case in the future we add some libs, some apt-get guy detect it but we
> > do not update this script accordingly.
>
> build-dep relies on the person maintaining the package for the distro.
>  His/her choices
> and ours are different.  For one thing, we've decided that he/she is way
> too slow.  For
> another, we've decided to build and *patch* boost ourselves.  Getting our
> dependencies
> from his choices made a year ago do not make sense to me.  No one knows
> more about how to
> compile KiCad on Ubuntu than the core developers.  For example, the
> boost-dev distro
> package is not a prerequisite to build KiCad using CMake, but that would
> erroneously come
> in using build-dep.
>
>
> I have employees and contractors using this script now, it will have to
> work for me at all
> times, this makes me a watchdog and a maintainer of the script.
>
>
> >
> > Dick, thanks for the "make package" thing. I think it is great !
>
> The *.deb is not great.  CMake is great.  The *.deb that is built does not
> proclaim any
> prerequisites at run-time nor at build-time.  So that *.deb is only
> suitable for the
> machine on which it was built.  Or a distro exactly at that same version,
> which also has
> all the run-time dependencies installed.  Neither our script, nor the
> *.deb says anything
> about the run-time dependencies.  Run-time dependencies are a subset of
> build-time
> dependencies.
>
> For a person familiar with what "checkinstall" does, using a *.deb
> generated this way will
> give a person a record in the local package management system as to the
> files that were
> installed.  It is not much more than that.
>
> Note that
>
>    $ sudo make uninstall
>
> seems to work fairly well also, as well as
>
>    $ sudo dpkg -r kicad
>
> would work after installing the lean *.deb file.
>
>
>
> > I
> > have done some googleing and noticed that for instance slackware Linux
> > does maintain a "recent" version (03/2013) of KiCad:
> > http://slackbuilds.org/result/?search=kicad&sv=14.0
>
>
> I have generic-ized the script to support different notions of the
> install_prerequisites
> step.  In theory more distros could be added for those folks wanting to
> build from source.
>
>
>
> >
> > Debian people do it too but it is 1.5 years old. I contacted the
> > maintainer but mail bounced back.
> >
> > There is also and unofficial Debian/Ubuntu apt-get repo that looks
> > very official and that we could use:
> > http://www.apt-get.org/
> >
> > The question is kind of philosophical, who should maintain packages
> > and distribute open-source software? the developers of the software or
> > the guys doing Linux distros?
> >
> > Well guys, I think lots of progress on this subject has been made
> > since two weeks ago, I think cmake is the way to make .deb. I think
> > the script on the web is great for the people who want to compile. We
> > just need an additional step adding Adam's server in the equation?
> >
> > Adam, I'll have a look at Karl's stuff and contribute to the cmake but
> > first I'd like to fix all this .desktop files and especially this
> > icons issue. It seems to me that there is a little bit of a mess
> > there.
> >
> > Regards
> > Fabrizio
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 9:13 PM, Adam Wolf
> > <adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> There have been some discussion in Debian land about changing how they
> >> package Python-y stuff, that will make a world of difference for me.  It
> >> looks like it's going through, so there's light at the end of that
> tunnel
> >> too.
> >>
> >> Adam Wolf
> >> W&L
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Dick Hollenbeck <dick@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> CMake now builds a primitive *.deb file on Ubuntu/Mint/Debian.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> $ make package
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> It has no dependencies, so it about like using checkinstall.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Dick
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> >>> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> >>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> >> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> >> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> >>
> > .
> >
>
>