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

Re: wxAstroCapture / Astronomy working group



Hi Peter,

Peter Cock <p.j.a.cock@googlemail.com> writes:
>> "Request for Ideas - Astronomy working group"
>> https://lists.debian.org/debian-science/2014/01/msg00044.html
>>
>> I was wondering if anyone would be interested in packaging
>> (or at least helping to package) the Linux/Windows astronomy
>> image capture tool wxAstroCapture, which has recently been
>> released as an open source project

I am personally more interested in tools for professional astronomers;
however it would be definitely a big plus to also include software for
amateurs.

> I've got wxAstroCapture building for me on 64bit Ubuntu
> and on an Raspberry Pi (ARM running Raspbian), using
> standard Debian based packages for dependencies, so
> a standard Debian package should be possible:
> https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/wxAstroCapture/conversations/topics/2118

This is fine. If you would start packaging under the debian-science
maintainers group, I would also try to help you to get the problems
solved. For a complex program, it is however, still some amount of
work.

> However, currently the build system is defined using a
> codeblocks configuration file, which I was able to convert
> into a traditional Makefile using cbp2make:
> http://cbp2make.sourceforge.net
>
> Currently cbp2make isn't in Debian (as far as a I know),
> but even if it was, what would be the preferred setup?
>
> (a) Define cbp2make (or similar) as a build dependency
> and generate the Makefile at compile time?

This is definitely the preferred option. Even if it takes some more
time, it is the only way to maintain the package on a longer term. And,
as a side effect, it would make it easier for other packages using "code
blocks" to enter Debian.

> (b) Bundle the generated Makefile with the Debian
> (c) Include the generated Makefile in the upstream repository

This is not possible since then you dont build the package from the
sources, but from some pre-generated file. It would sooner or later lead
to a bug report about this fact.

This is comparable to the requirement to rebuild the "configure" file
from the configure.ac & Co. sources [1]

> (d) Some other option?

(e) You could convince them to switch completely from codeblocks to a 
    Makefile :-)

(f) Another way would be to convince the codeblocks developer to include a
    command line tool for building. Codeblocks is already in Debian [2].

Best regards

Ole

[1] http://lintian.debian.org/tags/configure-generated-file-in-source.html
[2] https://packages.debian.org/source/sid/codeblocks


Reply to: