Re: status of the opencpn PPA for inclusion in Debian
On 03/21/2015 07:18 PM, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
>>> Maybe we can have the two packages diverge (between ubuntu and Debian)
>>> at that level. Eventually, those differences would go away as 3.0 gets
>>> propagated everywhere...
>> Maybe with some macros and ifdefs you could default to wx 3.0 but allow
>> compiling with wx 2.8?
> >From what I understand, it can easily be built against 3.0 already. It
> may even autodetect whatever is there already.
While it can be built, it is pretty sure there are issues in how it
works with wx3 on Linux, it received very little testing upstream and
certainly won't get any but totally trivial and safe wx3 related fixes
in the 4.0 series.
Master leading to 4.2 is a different thing, but currently alpha quality
due to Android support landing.
Until Precise reaches EOL it's support will get precedence over Debian
as for upstream it represents more users with less skill, equaling to
more support "costs" if it stops to be totally straightforward.
>>> I am not sure. Maybe other DDs (in CC) can provide feedback here, but I
>>> would recommend providing a smaller tarball with only the OpenCPN source
>>> code. First it takes up less space on all the mirrors, and second it
>>> will make the FTP master's job easier.
>>> But my gut feeling is that binaries without source *will* be a problem,
>>> even if the software is free (like say wxWidgets).
>> Yes, that will be a problem. I would suggest doing this:
>> Strip all the binaries and embedded code/data copies from your VCS
>> repository (git/svn/cvs/etc).
>> Automate the source tarball build process with the `make distcheck`
>> target of autotools/cmake etc and just create a source tarball
>> (opencpn-1.0.tar.xz) with no binaries or embedded code/data copies.
>> Automate the Windows build process and have it download the requisite
>> binaries at build time. Or if you prefer a Windows build without network
>> build access, create a script to download the Windows binaries and put
>> those in an opencpn-win32-dev.zip file that people can just unzip in the
>> right place before starting the build. If a second unzip step is too
>> much for people, you could produce a source tarball for the Linux
>> distros and a source tarball with all the binaries for Windows folks.
>> Personally I think Windows users probably don't want the source, they
>> would just want the compiled binaries.
> You said it brother, that is pretty much what I was thinking of. :)
> Thanks for your feedback pabs!
I would also love to live in a Debian/GNU centric world where Windows
users don't think they can build packages from source without reading
C++ for Dummies and OS X users that they use the only platform on
Earth... Unfortunately I don't ;)
Anyway, I have modified the Launchpad packaging scripts to strip
everything not needed for the Linux build while creating the source
tarball, how can it be submitted for review? Or should I submit a patch
for get-orig-source? Where and how
seems a bit out of date)?
I suppose the data packages opencpn-doc, opencpn-gshhs and
opencpn-tcdata should be usable in the same form they already have on