From: Brian G. <br...@ge...> - 2007-05-03 22:01:24
|
You can now find Debian packages for Player 2.0.4 and Stage 2.0.3 on the download page: http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=42445 Please let us know how these packages work for you. I aim to keep up the pattern of releasing .debs with each new version. Hopefully we'll end up in Debian/Ubuntu's tree sometime. Any requests for .rpms? Any volunteers to be .rpm maintainers? What about other formats? As a reminder, we're already in DarwinPorts. Thanks to all the package-hackers who have made this possible! brian. |
From: Geoffrey B. <g....@au...> - 2007-05-05 05:18:08
|
I've started having a look at ebuilds for gentoo. I'm aiming for the 2.1 release of player and hopefully stage to have them. Geoff Brian Gerkey wrote: > You can now find Debian packages for Player 2.0.4 and Stage 2.0.3 on > the download page: > > http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=42445 > > Please let us know how these packages work for you. > > I aim to keep up the pattern of releasing .debs with each new > version. Hopefully we'll end up in Debian/Ubuntu's tree sometime. > > Any requests for .rpms? Any volunteers to be .rpm maintainers? What > about other formats? > > As a reminder, we're already in DarwinPorts. > > Thanks to all the package-hackers who have made this possible! > > brian. -- Robotics research group, University of Auckland http://www.ece.auckland.ac.nz/~gbig005/ |
From: Brian G. <br...@ge...> - 2007-05-07 01:46:07
|
On May 4, 2007, at 10:17 PM, Geoffrey Biggs wrote: > I've started having a look at ebuilds for gentoo. I'm aiming for > the 2.1 > release of player and hopefully stage to have them. Great. To get you started, there are some old ebuilds in CVS, in the 'packages' module. I once submitted then to Gentoo, but the maintainers never got around to incorporating them. brian. |
From: Rich W. <rw...@sh...> - 2007-05-14 17:08:36
|
Brian Gerkey <br...@ge...> writes: > You can now find Debian packages for Player 2.0.4 and Stage 2.0.3 on > the download page: > > http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=42445 > > Please let us know how these packages work for you. Unpacking player (from player_2.0.4-thjc1_i386.deb) ... dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of player: player depends on libatk1.0-0 (>= 1.13.1); however: Version of libatk1.0-0 on system is 1.12.4-3. player depends on libc6 (>= 2.5-0ubuntu1); however: Version of libc6 on system is 2.3.6.ds1-13. player depends on libcairo2 (>= 1.4.2); however: Version of libcairo2 on system is 1.2.4-4. player depends on libgcc1 (>= 1:4.1.2); however: Version of libgcc1 on system is 1:4.1.1-21. player depends on libglib2.0-0 (>= 2.12.9); however: Version of libglib2.0-0 on system is 2.12.4-2. player depends on libgtk2.0-0 (>= 2.10.3); however: Version of libgtk2.0-0 on system is 2.8.20-7. player depends on libpango1.0-0 (>= 1.16.2); however: Version of libpango1.0-0 on system is 1.14.8-5. player depends on libstdc++6 (>= 4.1.2); however: Version of libstdc++6 on system is 4.1.1-21. player depends on libxrandr2 (>= 2:1.2.0); however: Version of libxrandr2 on system is 2:1.1.0.2-5. dpkg: error processing player (--install): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Can you compile it against stable rather than testing? cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | rw...@sh... technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadowrobot.com/hand/overview.shtml |
From: Toby C. <tco...@pl...> - 2007-05-14 20:35:40
|
Hi, These were compiled against Ubuntu feisty, I dont actually have a pure debian box to build against but I can investigate using pbuilder to generate them when I get some time... might not be until the weekend/next week. Toby On 5/15/07, Rich Walker <rw...@sh...> wrote: > > Brian Gerkey <br...@ge...> writes: > > > You can now find Debian packages for Player 2.0.4 and Stage 2.0.3 on > > the download page: > > > > http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=42445 > > > > Please let us know how these packages work for you. > > Unpacking player (from player_2.0.4-thjc1_i386.deb) ... > dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of player: > player depends on libatk1.0-0 (>= 1.13.1); however: > Version of libatk1.0-0 on system is 1.12.4-3. > player depends on libc6 (>= 2.5-0ubuntu1); however: > Version of libc6 on system is 2.3.6.ds1-13. > player depends on libcairo2 (>= 1.4.2); however: > Version of libcairo2 on system is 1.2.4-4. > player depends on libgcc1 (>= 1:4.1.2); however: > Version of libgcc1 on system is 1:4.1.1-21. > player depends on libglib2.0-0 (>= 2.12.9); however: > Version of libglib2.0-0 on system is 2.12.4-2. > player depends on libgtk2.0-0 (>= 2.10.3); however: > Version of libgtk2.0-0 on system is 2.8.20-7. > player depends on libpango1.0-0 (>= 1.16.2); however: > Version of libpango1.0-0 on system is 1.14.8-5. > player depends on libstdc++6 (>= 4.1.2); however: > Version of libstdc++6 on system is 4.1.1-21. > player depends on libxrandr2 (>= 2:1.2.0); however: > Version of libxrandr2 on system is 2:1.1.0.2-5. > dpkg: error processing player (--install): > dependency problems - leaving unconfigured > > Can you compile it against stable rather than testing? > > cheers, Rich. > > -- > rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | rw...@sh... > technical director 251 Liverpool Road | > need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 > www.shadowrobot.com/hand/overview.shtml > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express > Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take > control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. > http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ > _______________________________________________ > Playerstage-developers mailing list > Pla...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/playerstage-developers > -- This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged and/or confidential information |
From: Rich W. <rw...@sh...> - 2007-05-15 15:08:34
|
"Toby Collett" <tco...@pl...> writes: > Hi, > These were compiled against Ubuntu feisty, I dont actually have a pure > debian box to build against but I can investigate using pbuilder to generate > them when I get some time... might not be until the weekend/next week. No problem - drop me a line if you want them tested. cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | rw...@sh... technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadowrobot.com/hand/overview.shtml |
From: Toby C. <tob...@in...> - 2007-05-17 02:13:57
|
There is a new player package for testing at http://www.inro.co.nz/player_2.0.4-thjc2_i386.deb , can you give that a try and let me know if it works. This is built against sid so may not work with later releases Toby On 5/16/07, Rich Walker <rw...@sh...> wrote: > > "Toby Collett" <tco...@pl...> writes: > > > Hi, > > These were compiled against Ubuntu feisty, I dont actually have a pure > > debian box to build against but I can investigate using pbuilder to > generate > > them when I get some time... might not be until the weekend/next week. > > No problem - drop me a line if you want them tested. > > cheers, Rich. > > -- > rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | rw...@sh... > technical director 251 Liverpool Road | > need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 > www.shadowrobot.com/hand/overview.shtml > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express > Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take > control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. > http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ > _______________________________________________ > Playerstage-developers mailing list > Pla...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/playerstage-developers > -- This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged and/or confidential information |
From: Rich W. <rw...@sh...> - 2007-05-17 14:08:34
|
"Toby Collett" <tob...@in...> writes: > There is a new player package for testing at > http://www.inro.co.nz/player_2.0.4-thjc2_i386.deb , can you give that a try > and let me know if it works. This is built against sid so may not work with > later releases OK, that installed fine on my mostly-Debian-stable box. cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | rw...@sh... technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadowrobot.com/hand/overview.shtml |
From: Brian G. <br...@ge...> - 2007-05-17 18:20:46
|
On May 17, 2007, at 6:25 AM, Rich Walker wrote: > "Toby Collett" <tob...@in...> writes: > >> There is a new player package for testing at >> http://www.inro.co.nz/player_2.0.4-thjc2_i386.deb , can you give >> that a try >> and let me know if it works. This is built against sid so may not >> work with >> later releases > > OK, that installed fine on my mostly-Debian-stable box. Is there any value in the earlier version of the package, or should I just replace it with this new one? brian. |
From: Jack O'Q. <jac...@gm...> - 2007-05-17 18:24:43
|
On 5/17/07, Brian Gerkey <br...@ge...> wrote: > > On May 17, 2007, at 6:25 AM, Rich Walker wrote: > > > "Toby Collett" <tob...@in...> writes: > > > >> There is a new player package for testing at > >> http://www.inro.co.nz/player_2.0.4-thjc2_i386.deb , can you give > >> that a try > >> and let me know if it works. This is built against sid so may not > >> work with > >> later releases > > > > OK, that installed fine on my mostly-Debian-stable box. > > Is there any value in the earlier version of the package, or should I > just replace it with this new one? We have people using them on Feisty. They seem to work fine. In general, there ought to be separate repositories for each supported distribution and release. A project-hosted set of repos would be best (until they are picked up in the main Debian and Ubuntu repos. -- joq |
From: Patrick B. <pb...@cs...> - 2007-05-17 18:29:25
|
> Is there any value in the earlier version of the package, or should I > just replace it with this new one? > > brian. That depends. I thought the .deb Tony recently posted was built against Debian sid, while the earlier one was built against Ubuntu Feisty. They will probably have different library dependencies, and thus I *think* you should have both versions posted. I'm not near my Feisty machine right now, so I can't verify that the new .deb package works as nicely as the first one built for Feisty. |
From: Rich W. <rw...@sh...> - 2007-05-17 20:08:39
|
Patrick Beeson <pb...@cs...> writes: > > Is there any value in the earlier version of the package, or should I > > just replace it with this new one? Put both up and label them as differing. > That depends. I thought the .deb Tony recently posted was built against > Debian sid, while the earlier one was built against Ubuntu Feisty. They > will probably have different library dependencies, and thus I *think* > you should have both versions posted. > > I'm not near my Feisty machine right now, so I can't verify that the new > .deb package works as nicely as the first one built for Feisty. If you were only going to do one version, do one compiled against Debian stable. Reason: people are going to install stable on a robot platform, *because* it's stable. If you only ever expected the application to run on the desktop, then compiling against Ubuntu would make more sense... cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | rw...@sh... technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadowrobot.com/hand/overview.shtml |
From: Toby C. <tco...@pl...> - 2007-05-17 20:28:57
|
Hi, I have been working through how we can host the different distributions nicely. The same deb source package builds fine on feisty and etch, so its not to big an assumption that these will also build on sid and dapper (I think these are the four distros we want to support first up). The problem we have is that different binary builds of the source package are needed for each (possibly sid and feisty might be compatible, but I wouldn't put any money on it). In a standard ubuntu/debian repository you only have one set of binary packages and each dist has its only package list that points to these, but that requires the etch/sid/feisty/dapper packages to have different versions, which is not impossible but would require a branch of the debian packaging cvs tree for each of the dists, so if there is a way to avoid it I would prefer to (that would leave us with 8 branches of the packaging if we have 2.0 and 2.1 for each of the four dists. Another option is only release 2.0 for etch and dapper and have a debian/ubuntu branch and aim to get 2.1 into sid/gutsy. I will ponder this some more over the weekend and try to get a repository up somewhere next week, so if anyone has ideas or feedback on what standard procedure is please let me know. Toby On 5/18/07, Rich Walker <rw...@sh...> wrote: > > Patrick Beeson <pb...@cs...> writes: > > > > Is there any value in the earlier version of the package, or should I > > > just replace it with this new one? > > Put both up and label them as differing. > > > That depends. I thought the .deb Tony recently posted was built against > > Debian sid, while the earlier one was built against Ubuntu Feisty. They > > will probably have different library dependencies, and thus I *think* > > you should have both versions posted. > > > > I'm not near my Feisty machine right now, so I can't verify that the new > > .deb package works as nicely as the first one built for Feisty. > > If you were only going to do one version, do one compiled against Debian > stable. Reason: people are going to install stable on a robot platform, > *because* it's stable. > > If you only ever expected the application to run on the desktop, then > compiling against Ubuntu would make more sense... > > cheers, Rich. > > -- > rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | rw...@sh... > technical director 251 Liverpool Road | > need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 > www.shadowrobot.com/hand/overview.shtml > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express > Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take > control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. > http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ > _______________________________________________ > Playerstage-developers mailing list > Pla...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/playerstage-developers > -- This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged and/or confidential information |
From: Jamuraa <ja...@ba...> - 2007-05-18 00:02:41
|
On 5/17/07, Toby Collett <tco...@pl...> wrote: > Hi, > I have been working through how we can host the different distributions > nicely. The same deb source package builds fine on feisty and etch, so its > not to big an assumption that these will also build on sid and dapper (I > think these are the four distros we want to support first up). > > The problem we have is that different binary builds of the source package > are needed for each (possibly sid and feisty might be compatible, but I > wouldn't put any money on it). In a standard ubuntu/debian repository you > only have one set of binary packages and each dist has its only package list > that points to these, but that requires the etch/sid/feisty/dapper packages > to have different versions, which is not impossible but would require a > branch of the debian packaging cvs tree for each of the dists, so if there > is a way to avoid it I would prefer to (that would leave us with 8 branches > of the packaging if we have 2.0 and 2.1 for each of the four dists. > > Another option is only release 2.0 for etch and dapper and have a > debian/ubuntu branch and aim to get 2.1 into sid/gutsy. > > I will ponder this some more over the weekend and try to get a repository up > somewhere next week, so if anyone has ideas or feedback on what standard > procedure is please let me know. > > Toby I am building packages for player and stage for inclusion into Debian unstable (sid) right now. They should be able to get into the main archives, but I am not sure if you want to put them on the page because the player sources compile to 20 packages (21 if I split off the java bindings) due to the large numbers of libraries and rules regarding packages. Also, people would just be able to "apt-get install player" anyway. The stage packages clock in at 3 (libstage, libstage-dev, libstageplugin). I haven't tried compiling on etch or lenny yet, but I suspect that it would work from the source package. I should have a repository setup for testing later tonight with these sources.list lines: deb http://jamuraa.com/debian unstable main deb-src http://jamuraa.com/debian unstable main Currently a version of the player packages are there. Stage packages should be there soon. Michael Janssen |
From: Jamuraa <ja...@ba...> - 2007-05-18 04:08:17
|
Player and Stage packages can now be downloaded from the source: deb http://jamuraa.com/debian unstable main deb-src http://jamuraa.com/debian unstable main Player can be installed from the package 'player', stage from 'stage' Files needed to compile are in various library -dev packages, but there is a convenience package 'player-dev' to install all the player packages. 'libstage2-dev' will install the stage development files. One more thing to add to this thread: I'm going to upload the packages into the NEW queue tonight, but I would not be surprised in the slightest if they got REJECTed by the ftp-masters because player is quite the generic name for a piece of software. It may be advantageous to think of another package name (also, probably change the binary name). Suggestions for a new name are welcome. -- Michael Janssen --- Jamuraa --- ja...@ba... --- ja...@de... |
From: Brian G. <br...@ge...> - 2007-05-18 16:14:42
|
On May 17, 2007, at 9:08 PM, Jamuraa wrote: > > One more thing to add to this thread: > I'm going to upload the packages into the NEW queue tonight, but I > would not be surprised in the slightest if they got REJECTed by the > ftp-masters because player is quite the generic name for a piece of > software. It may be advantageous to think of another package name > (also, probably change the binary name). Suggestions for a new name > are welcome. In the past, we've used the prefix playerstage- (e.g., playerstage- player, playerstage-stage). That should be unique enough. brian. |
From: Rich W. <rw...@sh...> - 2007-05-18 11:38:40
|
Jamuraa <ja...@ba...> writes: > Player and Stage packages can now be downloaded from the source: > deb http://jamuraa.com/debian unstable main > deb-src http://jamuraa.com/debian unstable main > > Player can be installed from the package 'player', stage from 'stage' > Files needed to compile are in various library -dev packages, but there is a > convenience package 'player-dev' to install all the player packages. > 'libstage2-dev' will install the stage development files. > > One more thing to add to this thread: > I'm going to upload the packages into the NEW queue tonight, but I > would not be surprised in the slightest if they got REJECTed by the > ftp-masters because player is quite the generic name for a piece of > software. It may be advantageous to think of another package name > (also, probably change the binary name). Suggestions for a new name > are welcome. Is there any common situation where someone would install player without stage? If not, then my vote goes for calling the base packages player-stage player-gazebo If there is, then player-base player-stage player-gazebo would seem to work. cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | rw...@sh... technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadowrobot.com/hand/overview.shtml |
From: Brian G. <br...@ge...> - 2007-05-18 16:17:44
|
On May 18, 2007, at 4:17 AM, Rich Walker wrote: > > Is there any common situation where someone would install player > without stage? Definitely: on a robot. brian. |
From: Rich W. <rw...@sh...> - 2007-05-18 19:08:38
|
Brian Gerkey <br...@ge...> writes: > On May 18, 2007, at 4:17 AM, Rich Walker wrote: > >> >> Is there any common situation where someone would install player >> without stage? > > Definitely: on a robot. *bangs head against table* :-> -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | rw...@sh... technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadowrobot.com/hand/overview.shtml |