Mauro:
You are completely right. Getting the packages automatically is very
user-friendly. Furthermore, this will make media_build a great place to
start of users stuck with older kernels.
On Ubuntu, the package name is libproc-processtable-perl
the command to install it is (on Ubuntu, usually no root user is used,
but rather per command invokation).
The command for installation will be:
sudo apt-get install libproc-processtable-perl
There is no
/etc/system-release
on my system
However, there is a file /etc/lsb-release
cat /etc/lsb-release
DISTRIB_ID=Ubuntu
DISTRIB_RELEASE=10.04
DISTRIB_CODENAME=lucid
DISTRIB_DESCRIPTION="Ubuntu 10.04.2 LTS"
I will make an updated script in the next week.
Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
Em 18-06-2011 14:20, Jan Hoogenraad escreveu:
Mauro:
The change in build.sh
http://git.linuxtv.org/media_build.git?a=commitdiff;h=16cf0606fd59484236356e400a89c083e76da64b
now requires installation of a Perl package Proc::ProcessTable that is not
present in standard Ubuntu systems.
I needed to run
sudo aptitude install libproc-processtable-perl
before I could continue after the change.
Is there a way around this ?
The media_build requires several packages that may not be present on some
installation. The build.sh script has a logic to detect the missing parts
and to output what's the missing requirements:
echo "Checking if the needed tools are present"
run ./check_needs.pl
(I moved right now the perl-specific checks into check_needs.pl script)
Unfortunately, package names are distro-specific. So, as I use only Fedora/RHEL
here, the only hints it have are for them. From my experiences, between the
rpm-based distros, the package names are either equal or very close, so such
hints probably are probably good enough for Suse and Mandriva users.
From what I understand, the standard Ubuntu repositories already provide a
package
for Proc::ProcessTable. So, the only thing that it is not ok is the package
name hint.
Could you please provide us a patch adding the Ubuntu (and likely Debian)
package
name?
IMHO, the better would be to modify the check logic, in order to check what's
the
system, and provide a hint based on it. If the OS type is not found, then fall
back
to some default.
I think that the LSB default to get the distribution is by reading
/etc/system-release.
Those are provided on RHEL6 and Fedora (plus, the old way: /etc/redhat-release).
So, IMHO, all we need to do is to write a logic for the error report part of
the check,
that opens /etc/system-release, identify what's the distro, and provide the
package
name and some instructions on how to install the missing parts to the userspace.
The right way for adding such logic would be to install the OS's on some VM
with the
minimum install, run the script and add the missing parts on it.
Cheers,
Mauro.
--
Jan Hoogenraad
Hoogenraad Interface Services
Postbus 2717
3500 GS Utrecht
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
