Why do I need ubuntugis-unstable for grass-stable? Isn’t ubuntugis-stable a better choice? Now I have to get unstable GDAL, PROJ and QGIS in order to get stable GRASS. I would say that ideally ubuntugis-unstable should contain unstable or stable 7.
Recently, I helped my colleague to install GRASS from packages and Synaptic showed grass and grass7 packages both with version 7.0.0. I used grass7 and it works. So what is the actual state and preferred way of installing GRASS GIS 7 (on 14.04 and 15.04)?
Thanks,
Vaclav
PS: I’m talking about the current state and I don’t have an idea how it was few months ago. This was the first time I trusted the packaged version.
2015-06-15 15:12 GMT+02:00 Vaclav Petras <wenzeslaus@gmail.com>:
Why do I need ubuntugis-unstable for grass-stable? Isn't ubuntugis-stable a
no, it doesn't seems to be a better choice, check which versions are
provided by ubuntu-stable [1]. It seems to be not maintained so much
(GDAL 1.10), AFAIU only unstable is somehow up-to-date. There will be
someone here who will know more than me I guess.
2015-06-15 15:12 GMT+02:00 Vaclav Petras <wenzeslaus@gmail.com>:
Why do I need ubuntugis-unstable for grass-stable? Isn't
ubuntugis-stable a
no, it doesn't seems to be a better choice, check which versions are
provided by ubuntu-stable [1]. It seems to be not maintained so much
(GDAL 1.10), AFAIU only unstable is somehow up-to-date. There will be
someone here who will know more than me I guess.
The focus of the UbuntuGIS team is on the unstable repository, if you want
to improve the UbuntuGIS PPAs you should contribute to the team because
there is hardly anyone actively contributing to UbuntuGIS these days. The
same was true for the Debian GIS team, but both have found at least one
new contributor to keep things moving. But there is far more work to do
for the few active people to manage, please consider contributing.
Questions about the UbuntuGIS PPA should be directed to their list, I
don't think any of their contributor are subscribed to this list.
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Vaclav Petras <wenzeslaus@gmail.com> wrote:
Recently, I helped my colleague to install GRASS from packages and
Synaptic showed grass and grass7 packages both with version 7.0.0. I used
grass7 and it works. So what is the actual state and preferred way of
installing GRASS GIS 7 (on 14.04 and 15.04)?
On Launchpad [1] I also see that `ubuntugis-unstable` contains 7.0.0 for
14.04 (trusty), so shouldn't GRASS download page [2] use only
`ubuntugis-unstable` and `grass` package?
2015-06-15 16:27 GMT+02:00 Vaclav Petras <wenzeslaus@gmail.com>:
On Launchpad [1] I also see that `ubuntugis-unstable` contains 7.0.0 for
14.04 (trusty), so shouldn't GRASS download page [2] use only
`ubuntugis-unstable` and `grass` package?
GRASS PPA repo is more up-to-date, now it contains 7.0.1RC1 [1]. But
for the future it would make sense to merge grass-stable with
ubuntugis-unstable to avoid confusion.
On 06/15/2015 05:03 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
2015-06-15 15:12 GMT+02:00 Vaclav Petras <wenzeslaus@gmail.com>:
Why do I need ubuntugis-unstable for grass-stable? Isn't
ubuntugis-stable a
no, it doesn't seems to be a better choice, check which versions are
provided by ubuntu-stable [1]. It seems to be not maintained so much
(GDAL 1.10), AFAIU only unstable is somehow up-to-date. There will be
someone here who will know more than me I guess.
The focus of the UbuntuGIS team is on the unstable repository, if you want
to improve the UbuntuGIS PPAs you should contribute to the team because
there is hardly anyone actively contributing to UbuntuGIS these days. The
same was true for the Debian GIS team, but both have found at least one
new contributor to keep things moving. But there is far more work to do
for the few active people to manage, please consider contributing.
Questions about the UbuntuGIS PPA should be directed to their list, I
don't think any of their contributor are subscribed to this list.
As Bas mentioned, our focus recently is on UbuntuGIS unstable. The reason behind this: due to work been done in DebianGIS, recent Ubuntu releases (universe) already include stable versions of most software that was maintained in UbuntuGIS stable e.g. gdal , grass etc..
So our recent efforts are to maintain new package versions in UbuntuGIS unstable. At the same time, unstable ppa gets packages that are well tested from OSGeoLive ppa, so some of the development happens there these days...
Regarding grass packages:
DebianGIS took the decision to maintain only one version of grass, so grass7 never went upstream, but grass package points to 7.0.
Before that, both UbuntuGIS and OSGeoLive included both grass (6) and grass7 packages. Then, we pulled from DebianGIS, so now UbuntuGIS unstable includes grass package that points to 7.0.
Bottom line: grass (6) is in Ubuntu universe, grass(7) is in UbuntuGIS unstable and OSGeoLive ppas. UbuntuGIS stable is not maintained.
Best,
Angelos
--
Angelos Tzotsos
Remote Sensing Laboratory
National Technical University of Athens http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos
I got another user with conflicting packages after going through those steps, so I think the current instructions are not working (although if you have a fresh computer and follow the instructions closely, they work).
It is also not clear to me why we discuss packages so deeply at the wiki page. Should we just link there the install with “if you want to just install and not compile use…”? The current state leads you to packages in case you want tocompile. If the other suggested things pbuilder, debuild, cowbuilder and apt-get build-dep are useful, I don’t know I’ve newer used them (so they are probably not that useful). I would like to just delete both Very Important notes and Quick instructions sections as they just distract from the real stuff below.
Why do I need ubuntugis-unstable for grass-stable? Isn’t
ubuntugis-stable a
no, it doesn’t seems to be a better choice, check which versions are
provided by ubuntu-stable [1]. It seems to be not maintained so much
(GDAL 1.10), AFAIU only unstable is somehow up-to-date. There will be
someone here who will know more than me I guess.
The focus of the UbuntuGIS team is on the unstable repository, if you want
to improve the UbuntuGIS PPAs you should contribute to the team because
there is hardly anyone actively contributing to UbuntuGIS these days. The
same was true for the Debian GIS team, but both have found at least one
new contributor to keep things moving. But there is far more work to do
for the few active people to manage, please consider contributing.
Questions about the UbuntuGIS PPA should be directed to their list, I
don’t think any of their contributor are subscribed to this list.
As Bas mentioned, our focus recently is on UbuntuGIS unstable. The reason behind this: due to work been done in DebianGIS, recent Ubuntu releases (universe) already include stable versions of most software that was maintained in UbuntuGIS stable e.g. gdal , grass etc…
So our recent efforts are to maintain new package versions in UbuntuGIS unstable. At the same time, unstable ppa gets packages that are well tested from OSGeoLive ppa, so some of the development happens there these days…
Regarding grass packages:
DebianGIS took the decision to maintain only one version of grass, so grass7 never went upstream, but grass package points to 7.0.
Before that, both UbuntuGIS and OSGeoLive included both grass (6) and grass7 packages. Then, we pulled from DebianGIS, so now UbuntuGIS unstable includes grass package that points to 7.0.
Bottom line: grass (6) is in Ubuntu universe, grass(7) is in UbuntuGIS unstable and OSGeoLive ppas. UbuntuGIS stable is not maintained.
Best,
Angelos
–
Angelos Tzotsos
Remote Sensing Laboratory
National Technical University of Athens http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos
probably yes, packages from `ppa:grass/grass-stable` should be moved
to `ppa:ubuntugis/ubuntugis-unstable`. GRASS PPA should be used for
daily builds. Ma