*** For details on how to be removed from this list visit the *** *** CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk ***
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 09:26:56AM +0100, Paul Emsley wrote: > > On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 18:54 -0700, Tim Fenn wrote: > > > > After banging my head against the wall trying to get CCP4, SSM, MMDB > > and clipper installed in a multilib environment, I gave up and spent a > > few hours reconfiguring all the libraries to abide by GNU coding > > standards. So, if you'd like, feel free to download: > > > > ccp4c / ccp4f, mmdb, ssm and clipper from: > > For the record, I have for a while been provided GNU autotooled versions > of mmdb, SSM, ccp4c and (old) clipper from > > http://www.ysbl.york.ac.uk/~emsley/software/ and extras therein > I only found mmdb in those folders, and it lacked several requirements for what I needed (pkg-config support, library versioning, spec file setup). > > > clipper is only one library: libclipper. I felt having a library for > > every filetype supported probably wouldn't scale well. ;) > > There is a finite number. > I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at. > > I'd also like to try and get the packages accepted in the > > fedora-extras repositories, which is only one additional step beyond > > this point. However, I'm afraid the CCP4 license may not allow for > > it, if I'm reading it correctly. It seems the library is LGPL-ish, > > but only for academic users - is this true? > > If you get libccp4c from the above location, that is usable. (I have not > yet applied the patches from Ralf Grosse-Kunstleve). > Couldn't find it, and I don't know what "usable" means in this context. I'd like to pass the rpms along to fedora to distribute in their repositories, and want to make sure the CCLRC license is compatible with that, and if it is, the logistics of doing so (and from my discussions with Martyn Wynn, since there are a few extra clauses in the CCLRC licensing, this may not be simple with non-GPL/LGPL licensed software using the CCP4 library - see section 2.1.2 of the CCLRC license). > > If so, Fedora won't let > > their repository system near it. Otherwise, I'd *gladly* continue > > depositing rpms to fedora-extras with other programs that depend on > > the above (coot, ccp4mg, etc.), so one day I could just run: > > > > yum/smart install coot > > For my part, I'd be happy with that. > > > on my stock fedora boxen, let yum/smart pull in all the dependencies > > and be done with it. And given the build system, it would be a cinch > > to migrate everything to ubuntu, debian, RHEL, etc., and potentially > > save a few minutes of your system administrator's time. ;) > > The one main reason why I have not pushed this is because of conflicting > library names. We haven't yet worked out a system to avoid that. > What are you referring to specifically? Which libraries? How are they conflicting? Regards, Tim -- --------------------------------------------------------- Tim Fenn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Stanford University, School of Medicine James H. Clark Center 318 Campus Drive, Room E300 Stanford, CA 94305-5432 Phone: (650) 736-1714 FAX: (650) 736-1961 ---------------------------------------------------------
