[argyllcms] Re: Argyll CMS in Fedora (and Mandriva)
- From: Graeme Gill <graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 00:16:48 +1100
Patrice Vetsel wrote:
I'm trying to make an Ubuntu(Debian) package of argyllcms too, since
one week, and it's difficult because of jam use, and because i'm a
novice in packaging.
My plan (I think) is to switch to boost Jam, to address some of
problems with current Jam, although I haven't had the time to
address this yet.
Graeme Gill, do you plan to take care of patches made in Fedora and so
, do you are planing to release a new beta version soon ? (kind of
christmas release ;) )
I've tracked the bug fixes, but I haven't addressed all the warnings
thrown up yet. I'm also half way through some other changes, although
it's at a relatively stable point right this minute. I was also
hoping that Hal V. Engel might get back to me with some hints about
the problems he's had running his Huey under MSWindows XP.
Is it possible to have an .ksh script (like makeall.ksh) that do a clean
installation of argyllcms in /usr/ (taking care of a path givin in
parameter - default in /usr/local), this will simplify installation from
sources, and also packaging for distributions.
I'm not sure exactly what you're after. The top level script is rather
a hack to compensate for Jam not handling both top down and bottom up
builds. I'm hoping boost Jam will solve this, although it won't solve
the circular dependency issues.
The serial and USB access permissions on the instruments is also a
problem. I have no clear picture of how different distributions
are organizing such things with regard to hotplug or udev, all I
know from feedback is that all the systems seem to do things differently,
and it all seems poorly documented.
This makes it difficult to write portable code!
Why do you are providing libtiff and libusb in sources ?
For portability. It makes Argyll self contained, and not dependent
on the availability or versions of other libraries. This particularly
applies to the binary distributions. I've also had to modify libusb
to get it to work properly with certain instruments (libusb/darwin.c and
libusb/linux.c).
> Is it possible
to take care that, under linux, argyllcms should be built automatically
with distribution packages of libtiff-dev and libusb-dev, and not by
libs that you provide in src ? (i must patch sources to compile with
distribution libs).
In principle for libtiff, yes, although I'm not familiar with how distributions
are
typical organized to be able to go about it. I'm not so sure about libusb though
because of my modifications.
Graeme Gill.
Other related posts:
