On 09/13/2010 05:01 PM, Martijn Kuipers wrote: > > On Sep 13, 2010, at 15:20 PM, Dick Hollenbeck wrote: > >> On 09/13/2010 08:53 AM, Martijn Kuipers wrote: >>> How do we want the OSX packages to look like (installer) ? >>> At the moment we have a DMG-generated from scripts and one generated with >>> CPack (I patched my CMakeList.txt with the patch from Jerry floating around >>> on the list). >>> >>> Neither are satisfactory, in my opinion. >>> >>> Let me explain: >>> If we add docs and libraries to the DMG file, then it is no longer >>> Drag&Drop. >>> Normally you drag the application (on our case the Kicad folder with all >>> applications) to the Applications link, which are both shown by the >>> installer in the finder. However, if we also include libraries in the DMG, >>> then these need to be installed in /Library/Application Support/kicad or in >>> $HOME/Library/Application Support/kicad (according to Marco). We don't want >>> the user to drag them into the applications. >>> >>> I see 2 posible solutions: >>> 1. Use packagemanager, which allows more complex installs. Disadvantage is >>> that you have no clue what is installed where and since there is no >>> uninstall I think it's rather messy. >>> 2. Split the libraries and applications in separate DMGs. I personally like >>> this option, since it allows you to easily update either Kicad or the >>> Libraries. Not sure what to do with docs. Can we put them in a sub-folder >>> in the Kicad folder under applications? Same with scripts ? >>> >>> I would love to hear your opinions on this. >>> >>> /Martijn >>> >> >> There are two classes of users: >> >> 1) those that install from a pre-built package. >> 2) those that install by building the source themselves. >> >> In the linux world there is a package manager person for each distro, >> and he is responsible for users in class 1) on his distro. >> So I actually think you should be talking to those people for that >> category of user. > > Sure. For Kicad who is the OSX package manager? I hope (s)he is reading this > list. As for Linux, I think Kicad ought to provide a static-version (should > fit most distros). Of course, if someone wants to add deb, rpm, etc., then > that is fine with me, it is just more work because of the version > dependancies between the different components. Wrapping a static-package > inside deb or rpm is not a good solution (my personal opinion).
There is no official OSX package manager (yet). Marco Serantoni did a good job to add some work to the kicad code-base for compiling and packing it. Then after some time I decided to also buy a macbook for personal reason and wrote some documentation about compiling and tried to improve it together with Marco. Also there are still some odd things when using Kicad on OSX for example the viewport is damn slow of PCBnew. But it is usable and functional. >> For category 2) users, I see no reason why cmake and/or one of its >> sibling programs cannot be used. This makes it easier for those of use >> that do not use OSx to stay in the conversation. > I don't object to cmake at all. I think the DMG is not as nice as it could > be, but I have not spend much time looking at all the options CPack gives you. > > If there is an area where Win/Linux/OSX can be different, it is in the > installers. And my questions were solely related to the OSX installer, where > I don't think the split I mentioned is so different from what we have now. I > don't think there are libraries included in the kicad source, they are in > kicad-lib-committers/kicad/library. The DragNDrop is preferred for applications. And a installer or a lose package with symbols/footprints/3d modules and documentation is shipped seperated. The odd on OSX is that if you did ran a installer and it dumps all the files and folders somewhere that there is no uninstaller like under linux package managers or windows installers. But the installer can be made smart so it will remove old folder of a previous install. > My suggestion would be to create 2 installers; > - Kicad application > - Libraries (with Libraries I mean eeschema components, footprints, > packages3d and modules). The name is confusing, but I did not mean things > like wxWidgets, Boost, etc. For me this idea is good enough, we should not forget the Mac UI/Packaging guidelines else it will be different from other macified software! > I am a "User 1" type, if I can find a recent enough version, otherwise I am > "User 2". But even as "User 2" I prefer to create packages and then install > those. As Kicad is getting more users and some people who write patches/join the mailing list it is better that there will be a official Mac OS X group within Kicad. This because things are very different on a Apple machine than on a PC (*Win, *NIX) with user interface. _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
