[Ctk-developers] CTK tag

Wed Dec 7 23:36:41 UTC 2011

Multiple SO names within CTK are possible.

Lets say we have the package libctk6 and it contains libCTKCore.so.0.1 .

If I bump libCTKCore.so.0.1 to libCTKCore.so.0.2 I would simply bump
libctk6 to libctk7. Slicer would still use libctk6. If I want Slicer
to use libctk7 then I would trigger a rebuild (without changing the
Slicer source package).

All you have to do is to tag a version.

-Dominique

On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Sascha Zelzer
<s.zelzer at dkfz-heidelberg.de> wrote:
> Hi Dominique,
>
> thanks for the P.S. ;-)
>
> I was aware of the content of the libctk0.1 deb package and that is actually
> the main reason for all of my questions. Would it even be possible to have
> multiple libraries with different SO names in the same package?
>
> Right now, if for example Slicer depends only on libCTKCore.so.0.1 and we
> create a new debian package and one of the other libraries requires a major
> version bump because of API incompatibility, wouldn't that mean that Slicer
> needs also to be repackaged (if the CTK package is upgraded on a system with
> also Slicer package installed)?
>
> Maybe this is all too theoretical and we are not at a stage yet where those
> things matter...
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sascha
>
>
> On 12/06/2011 11:43 PM, Dominique Belhachemi wrote:
>>
>> Hi Sascha,
>>
>> Moving each library in a separate package is possible but I wouldn't
>> want to do it. It is too much work.
>>
>> Currently, CTK is using the same major/minor/patch number for each
>> library.
>>
>> $ ls CTK-build/bin/
>> libCTKCore.so      libCTKCore.so.0.1.0       libCTKPluginFramework.so.0.1
>> libCTKCore.so.0.1  libCTKPluginFramework.so
>>  libCTKPluginFramework.so.0.1.0
>>
>>
>> The Debian package wouldn't change that. Please have a look at the
>> current package in 'experimental':
>>    http://packages.debian.org/experimental/amd64/libctk0.1/filelist
>>
>> Thanks
>> -Dominique
>>
>> P.S. Please not that "Ubuntu" = "Debian unstable + closed source
>> graphics driver" :)
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Sascha Zelzer
>> <s.zelzer at dkfz-heidelberg.de>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Dominique,
>>>
>>> Thanks a lot for your efforts!
>>>
>>> I am not experienced with Debian packages but I wonder what the actual
>>> set
>>> of libraries for such a CTK package would be. And how do the library
>>> versions relate to the package version? Shouldn't we package each library
>>> separately, or are those questions irrelevant for Debian unstable?
>>>
>>> I am also not sure if bumping the minor version is enough, especially if
>>> we
>>> look at the libraries as a whole. We had discussions about versioning of
>>> our
>>> libraries and having a global major/minor/patch set for all CTK versions
>>> is
>>> certainly not adequate. But maybe people do not care that much regarding
>>> Debian unstable...
>>>
>>> Sorry for the brain dump,
>>>
>>> Sascha
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/06/2011 05:05 PM, Dominique Belhachemi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Marco,
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I would use the tagged version for Debian. I just need something
>>>> what can be considered as "stable enough".
>>>>
>>>> CTK has already been accepted in 'experimental' back in July
>>>> (http://packages.qa.debian.org/c/ctk/news/20110717T133234Z.html). So
>>>> the upload to 'unstable' would take only a couple of minutes.
>>>>
>>>> Don't worry about MITK, we can always update the package in 'unstable'.
>>>>
>>>> Additionally to creating the tag I would like to see a bump in the
>>>> soname.
>>>> Updating the MINOR value would be the correct thing to do because I am
>>>> sure that the ABI/API changed a lot.
>>>> -set(CTK_MINOR_VERSION 1)
>>>> +set(CTK_MINOR_VERSION 2)
>>>>
>>>> But if this is not possible, updating the PATCH value would help as
>>>> well.
>>>> -set(CTK_PATCH_VERSION 0)
>>>> +set(CTK_PATCH_VERSION 1)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> -Dominique
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 7:46 AM, Marco Nolden
>>>> <m.nolden at dkfz-heidelberg.de>    wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Dominique,
>>>>>
>>>>> tagging is a really good idea, we already started discussions about
>>>>> this
>>>>> at
>>>>> the recent hackfest.
>>>>>
>>>>> Would you use this tag as a basis for the Debian packaging? As far as I
>>>>> know
>>>>> the Debian packaging procedure it will take some time till this really
>>>>> gets
>>>>> accepted in "unstable". What is the timeframe that you expect? Would
>>>>> you
>>>>> update CTK to a more recent version before entering "unstable"? I'm
>>>>> asking
>>>>> because we're also planning a debian package for MITK and we would at
>>>>> least
>>>>> need some fixes from the most recent version of CTK.
>>>>> Another option would be to apply some fixes on the Slicer 4 version and
>>>>> create a dedicated ctk-for-debian release branch on Github and discuss
>>>>> the
>>>>> fixes to put in there.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best
>>>>> Marco
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 12/06/2011 03:09 AM, Dominique Belhachemi wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was wondering whether it is possible to create a tag for CTK.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> More and more people are using ctk and it would be good to have
>>>>>> something like a pre-release. What do you thing about tagging the ctk
>>>>>> version Slicer 4 is using?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>> -Dominique
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Ctk-developers mailing list
>>>>>> Ctk-developers at commontk.org
>>>>>> http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ctk-developers
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Dipl.-Inform. Med. Marco Nolden
>>>>> Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum       (German Cancer Research Center)
>>>>> Div. Medical&    Biological Informatics          Tel: (+49) 6221-42
>>>>> 2325
>>>>>
>>>>> Im Neuenheimer Feld 280                        Fax: (+49) 6221-42 2345
>>>>> D-69120 Heidelberg                             eMail: M.Nolden at dkfz.de
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>> Ctk-developers mailing list
>>>> Ctk-developers at commontk.org
>>>> http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ctk-developers
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ctk-developers mailing list
>> Ctk-developers at commontk.org
>> http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ctk-developers
>
>