[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

[Pkg-grass-general] Debian GIS pakcage repository?



Is there a central place were we (the Debian GIS team)
are keeping our packages?

I propose that we all post our current packages  with
comments to a central location so we all have an idea
how the various sub-projects (grass, postgis,
mapserver, gdal, and others) are progressing.

Just a thought
Jon 


--- Hamish <hamish_nospam@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > This week I built a new gdal package and tried to
> create a
> > gdalgrass-package. You can find both on our
> ftp-server ([1] and [2])
> 
> nice
> 
> > I am not informed about the current way how grass
> is
> >   build [3] but I would prefer to have a libgrass
> and a libgrass-dev
> >   package if possible. Thus it only needs a few
> files for building
> >   gdalgrass and not the full grass modules but
> only the libraries to
> >   connect to a grass database. 
> 
> does 5.7's "make libs" create what you need?
> 
> 
> > [3] I tried to look at [4] but there seems to be
> some error while
> >     connecting to the database.
> > [4] https://alioth.debian.org/projects/pkg-grass/
> 
> works for me.
> 
> 
> ====
> (maybe this is more for Steve..)
> cross-posted from the grass5 mailing list, re this
> change in GRASS CVS:
> 
>
http://grass.itc.it/pipermail/grass-commit/2004-November/015869.html
> 
> 
> -		--with-gdal=/usr/bin/gdal-config \
> +		--with-gdal=/usr/local/bin/gdal-config \
> 
> 
> $ dpkg -L libgdal1-dev | grep gdal-config
> /usr/bin/gdal-config
> /usr/share/man/man1/gdal-config.1.gz
> 
> ??? shouldn't it just be --with-gdal? Isn't that
> redundant now that GDAL
> is not optional, omit altogether?
> 
> 
> 
> +		--without-odbc
> 
> The unixodbc-dev package is in the control file's
> "Build-Depends" list,
> why not use it?
> 
> 
> 
> Hamish
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pkg-grass-general mailing list
> Pkg-grass-general@lists.alioth.debian.org
>
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-general
> 




Reply to: