On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 07:33:06PM +0200, Lutz Vieweg wrote: > This thread has turned into a bitter fight over "distribution policies" > vs. "upstream maintainer's freedom of choice", where I see valid arguments > from both sides as well "too much emotion". > > To contribute another view point: > > I am using the most recent and up-to-date CentOS release, also on the > laptop that I have with me to transfer dive data to, on boats on remote > oceans. > > Building Subsurface on CentOS from the sources has been very easy for > versions up to 3.x. > > Building Subsurface on CentOS has been somewhat cumbersome starting > from version 4.0, due to lots of dependencies unavailable from the > distribution, but was still done in an hour or so. > > Yesterday I endeavored to build the Subsurface git master head on CentOS, > and it was kind of a nightmare - everything, from > just-one-patchlevel-version-of- > cmake-ahead-of-what-CentOS-delivers, continuing with of course Qt 5 in a > very certain version, and with lots of compile-time options to be tweaked, > up the customized libgit/gmerlin/marble libraries had to be built from > scratch, it took me ~50 attempts of error-spilling compiles until > all the strange dependencies were finally resolved, resulting in a > ~500MB sized installation directory.
Which version of CentOS do you run? If I get the copr running, we could easily add an epel7 branch and see what fails to build there, this might help a bit. (For EL6 I have little hope we can get it to run w/o spending days on it, but maybe I could be surprised :) ) Pierre _______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list [email protected] http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
