On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 06:45:51AM -0800, Dirk Hohndel wrote: > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 08:05:25AM +0200, Willem Ferguson wrote: > > Would it require a lot of time to create an AppImage of this tool? As far as > > I can make out, it is built as a special case of the "normal" Subsurface > > build, the main difference being the requirement for two additional > > libraries. I cannot see that this AppImage build would need any real > > maintenance because the regular updates and patches to Subsurface are > > unlikely to affect the import process (unless of course the xml/ssrf format > > itself changes). One could simply call this AppImage something like > > smtk2ssrf_v4.6 so that we know it was derived from Subsurface v4.6. Am I > > being naïve? > > I haven't looked into it, but it does not seem to be too hard. > As everything else that I do (that all of us do), it's all a matter of > time. What should I be spending my "Subsurface time" on? How many people > will actually want to use that AppImage?
In order to get an idea how hard this would be I tried to build the SmartTrak importer locally. Of course it doesn't build anymore (Anton removed our own copy of the dc descriptor). So I fixed that and then tried to import a sample slg file and it crashes in smtk_time_to_sec - at which point I decided that I had spent all of the time I had for this this morning. /D _______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list [email protected] http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
