Hello, Well I believe that's all with FAST library dependencies migrated and adapted. I'm having a slight issue with making out what dependencies are still missing from debian/control, as cowbuilder still fails. For me, cowbuilder seems to have truncated the output of cmake compared to the more dirty way of using dpkg-buildpackage so I cannot make sense as to what is missing. Is there a way as to increase verbosity or alter settings? Best Regards, Shayan Doust On 09/08/2019 00:04, Shayan Doust wrote: > Hello Andreas, > >>> Although I do not understand why upstream are manually building these... >> >> If you are into packaging a bit longer you will face way more crazy >> ideas than this. Believe me, done this for > 20 years and have seen >> a lot of crazy things. ;-) > > Thinking about this now, I think upstream did this to not break windows > - linux cross-compability. Yet again, it should be done in a fashion as > to check if not win32 and lib exists on the system and use that instead > of downloading. > > I also spent around an hour or two patching and successfully building > the realsense library only to find that this is an optional module not > enabled by default in fast cmake - whoops :(. > > The quest to erradicate git as a dependency and migrate libs still > continues :). This is an interestingly lengthy package. Luckily it's > only QT and its seemingly many modules that is the major library that > needs dealing with and then everything else is simpler and quicker. > > Best Regards, > Shayan Doust > > On 08/08/2019 16:06, Andreas Tille wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 03:44:57PM +0100, Shayan Doust wrote: >>> Hello Andreas, >>> >>> Thanks, that makes sense. I will patch anything that needs building >>> instead of allowing git to download then build. >>> >>> Although right now, I am still in the process of migrating everything to >>> use libs that have already been packaged and are available via apt, >>> though until I go through everything one by one I won't be too sure as >>> to what is not available via apt. >>> >>> Although I do not understand why upstream are manually building these... >> >> If you are into packaging a bit longer you will face way more crazy >> ideas than this. Believe me, done this for > 20 years and have seen >> a lot of crazy things. ;-) >> >> Kind regards >> >> Andreas. >> >> >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature