On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:49 AM, Richard Shaw <[email protected]> wrote:
> Here's the result of the main package (minus documentation and header
> files, those are packaged separately):
> $ rpm -qlp OpenImageIO-0.10.0-1.fc14.x86_64.rpm
> /usr/bin/iconvert
> /usr/bin/idiff
> /usr/bin/igrep
> /usr/bin/iinfo
> /usr/bin/iprocess
> /usr/bin/iv
> /usr/bin/maketx
> /usr/lib64/libOpenImageIO.so.0.10
> /usr/lib64/libOpenImageIO.so.0.10.0
> /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/OpenImageIO.so
> /usr/share/doc/OpenImageIO-0.10.0
> /usr/share/doc/OpenImageIO-0.10.0/CHANGES
> /usr/share/doc/OpenImageIO-0.10.0/INSTALL
> /usr/share/doc/OpenImageIO-0.10.0/LICENSE
>
> Does this look correct?
Looks about right to me.
> Some remaining issues:
>
> 1. Make install doesn't need to copy over CHANGES, INSTALL, &
> LICENSE... the %doc macro takes care of that, and even if it did need
> to put them somewhere, /usr isn't it.
Yeah, people who try installing oiio from source into /usr/local are
going to have a rather disappointing experience as it spams things into
nonstandard locations. The structure is appropriate for installation
into a dedicated directory though (which I assume is the desired
behaviour when deploying at a studio)... so I'm not exactly sure what to
do about this. Thoughts anyone?
> 2. Right now I'm putting the libraries in /usr/lib{,64} which means I
> need to run ldconfig. Is this the correct location
Sounds right.
> or would a named
> subdirectory be more appropriate? (i.e. /usr/lib{,64}/OpenImageIO/)
What is this usually used for? libOpenImageIO is intended to be linked
against by the user, so having it out of the standard linker path
doesn't seem right.
> 3. There's no man pages for the binaries. It's not an absolute
> requirement for Fedora but it's *STRONGLY* recommend for any command
> line program.
>From work that Larry just posted it looks like idiff, iinfo, iprocess,
and possibly iconvert, maketx may dissappear in the near future, so I
doubt there will be much interest in writing comprehensive docs for
these right now. Would it be sufficient for a quick & dirty job to use
txt2man on the --help output?
I tried looking at latex2man but the latex docs (which are very nice
actually) are in totally the wrong format and it would be a fair bit of
work to get reasonably standard man pages out of them.
> If anyone is interested in looking at the spec file:
>
> http://pastebin.com/79k1cz94
Interesting to see, thanks.
~Chris
_______________________________________________
Oiio-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org
