[gdal-dev] packaging gdal for debian

Tom Parker tapadmin at s...
Fri Jun 7 12:50:11 EDT 2002


That makes sense of course, I really just wanted to bring it to your
attention not ask you to do any extra work.

At first Cmake seemed redundant, but after adding several of my own classes
to vtk it is growing on me. All I have to do is copy the code back and forth
between windows and linux and rerun Cmake to generate the makefiles. Then if
I want something like tcl/tk, python or java wrappers I just change the
setting in Cmake and rebuild. I can also easily keep multiple versions of
the libraries on each machine for different purposes.

Thanks again for all your good work and if my customers don't mind I'll
share the vtk wrappers for gdal/ogr with the group.

Regards,
Tom

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frank Warmerdam [mailto:warmerdam at p...]
> Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 8:30 AM
> To: gdal-dev at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [gdal-dev] packaging gdal for debian
>
>
> Tom Parker wrote:
> > VTK from www.kitware.com or public.kitware.com provides a tool for cross
> > platform projects named Cmake (currently 1.4 beta) that it
> seems would be
> > ideal for the gdal/ogr/proj/grass/... projects.
> >
> > You basically provide a list of *.c, *.cpp, *.cxx files,
> headers, libraries
> > and hit the OK button. Cmake then builds your project files for you. It
> > works great on my winders and linux boxes, has anyone else tried it?
> >
> > Why not use it??, it is released under the MIT license, same as GDAL/OGR
> > right?
>
> Tom,
>
> "Why not use it?" - Ummm, inertia? Fear of being different?
>
> I looked over the documentation and I must admit it is appealing
> to think of
> having one core build system for MSVC and unix builds. However,
> I could likely
> accomplish that with GNUmake if I was willing to add this as a
> dependency for
> windows builds and I would need a pretty compelling reason to
> rewrite my whole
> build structure.
>
> > And after reading my own email I guess my next question is:
> >
> > Do any of your customers actually expect debian packages or an
> RPM? Mine
> > freak if I don't deliver an InstallShield setup.exe file
> packaged project
> > for winders. The only one who ever codes to gdal/ogr/proj is
> me. All I need
> > are *.so/*.dll files for distribution.
>
> None of my paying customers are looking for .debs or .rpms. For many I
> deliver source trees, sometimes with "simplified" build mechanisms custom
> to the customer. For others I deliver finished executables. I
> haven't needed
> to deliver pretty installation programs so far luckily.
>
> I see .deb and .rpm support as being primarily in support of those who use
> GDAL as a whole - often with other products like GRASS, MapServer, OpenEV.
> It is more aimed at popularizing use of GDAL than supporting my customers.
>
> Best regards,
>
> --
> ---------------------------------------+--------------------------
> ------------
> I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam,
> warmerdam at p...
> light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
> and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Programmer for Rent
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>





More information about the Gdal-dev mailing list