OpenCPN Build on Debian

[bdbcat]

AntonM...

Lets look at these one-by-one.

1. georef.c is fixed. All GPL or public domain.
2. gpc.h is gone.
3. a. macsercomm.cpp macsercomm.h macutils.c macutils.h
still questionable.
b. routeprop.cpp routeprop.h
opencpn original code, simply missing header.
c. scrollingdialog.cpp scrollingdialog.h
wxWidgets license, source missing header.
d. sercomm.cpp sercomm.h
checking now. I think this is dead, could be removed.
e. triangulate.h
Public domain, missing header.

4. s57data/* is , well, data. No source. Part of openev (GPL) project.
Maybe needs a header?

5. Sounds files are gone, never were in CVS. Should not be in .deb package. Gone in next release.

6. src/NMEA0183 license: Its good enough for me. I'll email the author.

7. Copyright notice in all headers.. Question of style, but easy fix.

So, you can see that the only real issues are with the Mac support utilities. We'll need to look at these more closely. We'll need help from a Mac developer here......

Otherwise, I'm satisfied that the license issues are clear for our distribution. Debian mentors may be more picky. If we want Debian repository inclusion, we will have to find a replacement for src/NMEA0183. No doubt lots of make-work. Low priority for me.

I'll try to close some of the sourceforge issues as time, Wifi bandwidth and sourceforge uptime permits.

Thanks
Dave

[antonm]

Originally Posted by bdbcat

4. s57data/* is , well, data. No source. Part of openev (GPL) project.
Maybe needs a header?

I guess that it should be either a header if it is possible to include one or some COPYRIGHT file in the same dir that describes where those files come from and under which license.

Originally Posted by bdbcat

6. src/NMEA0183 license: Its good enough for me. I'll email the author.

The problem with it is that it does not explicitly grant right to "copy", "modify" and "distribute", but only "use". And thus it comes picky from legal stand point.

Originally Posted by bdbcat

Otherwise, I'm satisfied that the license issues are clear for our distribution. Debian mentors may be more picky. If we want Debian repository inclusion, we will have to find a replacement for src/NMEA0183. No doubt lots of make-work. Low priority for me.

From legal stand point Debian does not require more than required by GPL license itself. Good that most of issues are resolved and only few things are left.

As of NMEA code most likely it is a matter of contacting the author. Looks to me he intended to place the code into the public domain and maybe it just needs to be clearly stated. Or some "license" applied instead. It's up to the author to decide.

[manimaul]

Originally Posted by bdbcat

6. src/NMEA0183 license: Its good enough for me. I'll email the author.

Otherwise, I'm satisfied that the license issues are clear for our distribution. Debian mentors may be more picky. If we want Debian repository inclusion, we will have to find a replacement for src/NMEA0183. No doubt lots of make-work. Low priority for me.

Dave

It may appear that Debian's strict policies are over-zealous and at times perhaps they are. However, I think it is mostly for good reason. Adherence will only provide a solid level of protection for OpenCPN and the community. And, this allows groups like the Electronic Freedoms Foundation to more easily help in the event of trouble.

There is a really good interview on FLOSS weekly about an open source project's legal battle that probably could have been more easily avoided if stricter licensing would have been chosen and implemented.

FLOSS Episode 117 MP3 27.8MB

FLOSS is a great show also...featuring open source software and developers.

[bdbcat]

Will...

Well said, and I agree in principle....

However, priorities pull, and wheels squeak

As always, relevant code patches welcome

btw, author of NMEA0183 classes responded to email, agreed to GPL release. He considers the original to be BSD licensed in spirit. Good news!

I'll add the proper GPL headers in the next Release.

Dave

[HamishB]

good news about the NMEA0183 code. the two .wav files were the clearest problems IIRC. The author's email should be copied into the header comments of the source code.

regards,

[HamishB]

Originally Posted by bdbcat[br]
4. s57data/* is , well, data. No source. Part of openev (GPL) project.
Maybe needs a header?

In the USA the Supreme Court has ruled that data is not copyrightable (copying the white pages ruling). Here in NZ data is copyrightable.
Please add the header.

antonm wrote:
I guess that it should be either a header if it is possible to include one or some COPYRIGHT file in the same dir that describes where those files come from and under which license.

IIRC you get a deblint warning if you add multiple COPYRIGHT files. If the data file can take header comments, do that. If not, live with the deblint warning.

cheers,
Hamish

[HamishB]

4. s57data/* is , well, data. No source. Part of openev (GPL) project.

libS52 is hosted in OpenEV's cvs at sf.net, but I wouldn't call it part of it. (fwiw)

by the way, Sylvain has done a large amount of work on it in the last months and it is now much improved. any plans to sync? (new stuff is GPL3 (fwiw))


regards,
Hamish

[bdbcat]

HamishB

Have not looked at libs52 recently. Original version was heavily dependent on OpenGL rendering engine. Nice for an ENC viewer, but way too slow for a panning, zooming, quilting ECS. We really must have image caching and partial window rendering on screen pans for acceptable performance. Likewise caching of PLIB symbols as blittable bitmaps.
Might have worked if we could have planned on hardware accelerated graphics cards with big frame buffers, but these were not common on entry level hardware at the time, never mind the cross-platform headaches that would have come from that approach.

So I integrated a bunch of one-off bitmap renderers, put a c++ wrapper around it, and let it rip. Sylvain looked at it and seemed happy enough...

Maybe for a future build option with suitable hardware?

On a related topic, I'm considering the data files as GPL, and will add headers.

Dave

[antonm]

New Debian package is available against the latest released version of OpenCPN 2.1.624. As usual it is available via my repository by adding the following to /etc/apt/sources.list:

deb http://debian.martchukov.com/apt/ sid main contrib non-free
deb-src http://debian.martchukov.com/apt/ sid main contrib non-free

and then

 
sudo aptitude update
sudo aptitude install opencpn

Will recheck what is left for official inclusion. Current package uses external zlib and libbz2 and libgps, however I only tested it via direct serial GPS device yet.

[bdbcat]

antonm

Bit of a hiccup on the Release

Please sync your repo with latest sourceforge package

opencpn_2.1.624a-1_i386.deb

Thanks
Dave

[antonm]

Originally Posted by bdbcat

Please sync your repo with latest sourceforge package

Uploaded debian package for 2.1.624a

[asdont]

sorry
but the repo return the "404 not found" error
can you fix it, because the link at the opencpn site for the 64bits Debian download a version that give me an error "Wrong architecture 'i386'"
thank you

[antonm]

Originally Posted by asdont

sorry
but the repo return the "404 not found" error
can you fix it, because the link at the opencpn site for the 64bits Debian download a version that give me an error "Wrong architecture 'i386'"
thank you

Hmm. The repo is working fine, just checked it on the clean machine. Could you send more specific error details that you get?

I do not build amd64 packages at the moment and thus there are no amd64 packages in my repository. Since there is a request, I will try to produce one. Will post an update when it is there.

[asdont]

that is what i get wen i do a apt update in terminal:
....
Ign Anton Martchukov's Debian Repository sid/non-free Sources
Hit http://archive.getdeb.net lucid-getdeb Release
Err Anton Martchukov's Debian Repository sid/main Packages
404 Not Found
Err Anton Martchukov's Debian Repository sid/contrib Packages
404 Not Found
Err Anton Martchukov's Debian Repository sid/non-free Packages
404 Not Found
Hit Anton Martchukov's Debian Repository sid/main Sources
Hit Anton Martchukov's Debian Repository sid/contrib Sources
Hit Anton Martchukov's Debian Repository sid/non-free Sources
....

[antonm]

Originally Posted by asdont

that is what i get wen i do a apt update in terminal:
....

Okay. I have checked apache logs and this is due to the fact that your package manager requests amd64 packages from the repository. Since there are none there is also no binary-amd64 folder that produces HTTP 404 not found error.

I will start producing amd64 packages as soon as I set some suitable building environment. Just do not have amd64 box at hand to quickly build the package right away. Sorry about that.