Am Thu, 6 Oct 2022 07:33:15 -0700 (PDT) schrieb "[email protected]" <[email protected]>:
>
>
> On Thursday, October 6, 2022 at 7:38:43 AM UTC-4 kornel wrote:
>
> > why don't you use 'make package'? That way. you should get a file like
> > hugin-2021.1.0.8500-Linux.deb, which may be installed with
> > # sudo dpkg -i hugin-2021.1.0.8500-Linux.deb
> >
> > I have no guess why the OP chose not to do that. But I always choose not
> to do that because I want to build and test my own binaries separate and
> not interfering with downloading and testing the distribution's binaries.
>
> Feel free to teach me something about the process that I am
> misunderstanding (I'm an expert C++ programmer, stumbling around in the
> dark on many of the build vs. distribution topics), but so far as I have
> discovered, building all the way to an installable package makes it harder
> to do an isolated test of your new binaries.
>
Why is it harder? There is only one step extra involved.
You have
$ make all
$ sudo make install
while with package you use
$ make package
which includes 'make all', and
$ dpkg -i <package>
which makes the install
There is no difference for testing IMO.
Kornel
--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at:
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"hugin and other free panoramic software" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/20221006165806.0ff29076%40admin1-desktop.
pgp83E5q20yw4.pgp
Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP
