What installs the headers into /usr/local/include/Gem? The Gem package in Debian/Ubuntu installs into /usr/include/Gem, so -I/usr/include/Gem needs to be there. If some standard installer installs into /usr/local/include/Gem, then I'd keep -I /usr/local/include/Gem in CFLAGS_linux, otherwise I'd leave it to people to edit the Makefile to add their custom Gem header install locations.
.hc On Dec 27, 2012, at 9:30 AM, Antoine Villeret wrote: > hi, > > thansk for that, > > i had to change the CLAGS_linux variable (line 39) to : > CFLAGS_linux = -I/usr/local/include/Gem `pkg-config --cflags opencv` > > to make it > but I don't know if I should or not push it to the SVN ? > > -- > do it yourself > http://antoine.villeret.free.fr > > > 2012/12/27 Hans-Christoph Steiner <h...@at.or.at>: >> >> Ok, I committed a Makefile based on the Library Template. It does not build >> pix_opencv_contours.cc pix_opencv_matchshape.cc, they both gave a big dump >> of roughly the same errors. >> >> The template Makefile will handle a lot of things automatically for you, the >> trade-off is that its strict about certain things: every object must have a >> help patch, all example files must go into examples/, etc. The template >> Makefile is really easy to make a Debian package from too. > > really easy why not, but how ? > if I should make it myself I need a little more help... > the links on the page : http://puredata.info/dev/DebianPackagingStructure > are not broken but doesn't point to the right discussion... > anyway, I found the discussion and others but can't find anywhere a > good step by step howto build debian package > sorry, this will be my first debian package :-) > > >> >> * is pix_opencv_opticalflow.pd an example or an abstraction? If its an >> example, it should go into examples/ with of.frag. If its an abstraction, it >> should have a help patch. Or if its just a text patch, it can be left out >> of the Makefile and left as is. > > I forgot this one... > I placed it in the examples/ folder for now > but working on optical flow externals is in my todo list (with gpu and opencl) > >> >> * pix_opencv_blobtrack.cc seems to require opencv2, does that mean both >> opencv 1.2 and opencv 2.x need to be installed? Is there an OpenCV2 >> framework for Mac OS X? > > yes, most of recent and future externals take advantages of the new > C++ API of OpenCV 2.x > OpenCV 2 releases are distribute as a tarball for Linux/OSX, there is > no Framework on the download page http://opencv.org/downloads.html > and a quick search lead to multiple posts over the internet on how to > build it by hand (which very easy since the new cmake system) > and also a precompiled package : > http://vislab.cs.vt.edu/~vislab/wiki/images/4/44/OpenCV2.0.dmg > found here : http://opencv.willowgarage.com/wiki/Mac_OS_X_OpenCV_Port > but it's obsolete > > ++ > a > >> >> On Mac OS X, I was building against Pd-extended 0.43 since pix_opencv uses >> some new Gem headers that aren't included in Pd-extended 0.42. The template >> Makefile automatically looks in Pd-extended if its in /Applications. If you >> want to choose which version of Pd-extende to build against: >> >> make PD_PATH=/Applications/Pd-0.43.4-extended-20121223.app/Contents/Resource >> >> .hc >> >> On Dec 26, 2012, at 3:11 PM, Antoine Villeret wrote: >> >>> hello, >>> >>> I made an update today on pix_opencv with an improvement of >>> pix_opencv_contours which is now a complete replacement of other >>> pix_opencv_contours_* objects >>> >>> and I sent a private mail to Lluis even if I found some old mails on >>> this list by him and i never get any answer >>> so maybe you can go ahead according to the "one week consensus" ? >>> >>> there is actually one strange make rule, its for a custom blobtracker >>> but I will change this as soon as i have time >>> >>> merry chrismas to all >>> >>> cheers >>> >>> a >>> -- >>> do it yourself >>> http://antoine.villeret.free.fr >>> >>> >>> 2012/12/13 Hans-Christoph Steiner <h...@at.or.at>: >>>> >>>> On Dec 13, 2012, at 12:21 PM, Antoine Villeret wrote: >>>> >>>>> 2012/12/13 Hans-Christoph Steiner <h...@at.or.at>: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Dec 13, 2012, at 3:43 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>>>> Hash: SHA1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 2012-12-12 19:42, Antoine Villeret wrote: >>>>>>>> i've already tried to make a C++ external from the template but i >>>>>>>> never reach something which works so if you have a working template >>>>>>>> please let me know >>>>>>> >>>>>>> pix-opencv depends on external libraries, and afaik often needs >>>>>>> specific versions thereof. >>>>>>> i think it is a perfect candidate to *not* use a template Makefile but >>>>>>> instead use something more intelligent like autotools, scons, >>>>>>> cmake,...which reminds me that it already does use autoconf >>>>>> >>>>>>>> and what about including it in Gem ? as it depends on it (and it >>>>>>>> may depends on very new feature such as ROI soon) i think it's a >>>>>>>> better choice >>>>>>> >>>>>>> pix-opencv is developed by different people than Gem. i think it is >>>>>>> good to keep the repositories (and user-management) separate. >>>>>>> so: i'd rather not have pix-opencv be "part" of Gem. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> but: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> i agree that pix-opencv could be made more readily available to users. >>>>>>> it might be a good idea to distribute it together with Gem-releases. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> so: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> the build-system needs little changes to build a pix_opencv found in >>>>>>> extra/ (basically, uncomment the relevant lines at the end of >>>>>>> extra/configure.ac and add a line to extra/Makefile.am) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> we could then create a script that pulls in pix-opencv to >>>>>>> extra/pix_opencv before the builds are actually started. >>>>>> >>>>>> autotools are very useful for detecting platform differences and making >>>>>> the build system respond differently based on that, like handling >>>>>> multiple optional dependencies like in Gem. For the case you describe, >>>>>> that works well with the template Makefile. For an object that requires >>>>>> a specific library, add it to LDFLAGS. If that library not installed, >>>>>> it'll throw an error, which is what you want since the object requires >>>>>> that library. pix_opencv requires opencv, and does nothing without it, >>>>>> so no autotools necessary. >>>>> >>>>> I don't know anything about autotool and it looks like quite dark for >>>>> me so if i can avoid another headache it's better :-) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> As for version differences, I generally find it way too much work to >>>>>> support building against various versions of the API and just choose one >>>>>> and standardize on it. Then, once this lib is widely distributed it >>>>>> could be worth building against different versions of opencv if there is >>>>>> demand. First get it out there for the majority of users, then deal >>>>>> with any relevant edge cases, otherwise you are likely to spend lots of >>>>>> time dealing with edge cases that might not really be relevant. >>>>>> >>>>>> My problem with autotools is that very few people know how to modify it, >>>>>> so the build system then rots because its not maintained and other >>>>>> issues. I've seen this happen to a lot of autotools build systems in Pd >>>>>> projects over the years. For example, Gem's autotools setup has gotten >>>>>> so complex, its almost impenetrable for me, and I've done a fair amount >>>>>> of autotools. This is one reason to not include every object in Gem. >>>>>> >>>>>> The Makefile that's there is already quite close to working. I'm happy >>>>>> to commit fixes to get it working if that's OK with the maintainers. >>>>>> I've committed to pix_opencv before. Indeed I did this work back in >>>>>> 2009 but sevy objected so it was reverted and abandoned: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://pure-data.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/pure-data/trunk/externals/pix_opencv/Makefile?r1=12563&r2=12571 >>>>> >>>>> I think we should ask Lluis for that >>>>> with the current Makefile in the SVN man should have opencv >= 2.3 >>>>> (some externals won't compile with previous OpenCV version) but there >>>>> is not check about that I think >>>>> and I can build with >>>>> ./configure --with-pd=<PATH> --with-gem=<PATH> >>>>> make >>>> >>>> The Makefile equivalent of this is: >>>> >>>> make PD_SRC=<PATH> GEM_SRC=<PATH> >>>> >>>> Otherwise it'll look in the default installed locations for the headers. >>>> >>>>> but only tested on Ubuntu >>>>> I don't know if it could build on other linux distro and even less on >>>>> Mac OS X and Windows >>>>> Should fixing that Makefile.in be a starting point to distrute the >>>>> package ? >>>> >>>> Let me know and i'll do it. Is Lluis on this list? Yes, I can include >>>> 'make osx_tarball' so its easy to make the tarball for releases. >>>> >>>> .hc >>>> >>>> >> _______________________________________________ GEM-dev mailing list GEM-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/gem-dev
