[Digikam-users] Re: DigiKam compilation instructions

[Jim Dory]

Keep in mind that it depends on what distribution of linux you are
working with. On my system, I could easily create a button that
installs Digikam. All it would have to say is "emerge digikam" and I
would have the latest stable release and all dependencies - no
worries. And it builds from source.

Point is that I don't see how the developers of Digikam can be held
responsible for the lousy package systems of all distributions. (Lousy
in this sense anyway). One caveat is the latest stable release on my
distro is still at 1.7, but I expect today or next day or two it will
be bumped up to 1.8. They are usually on it within a day or two. I've
also built from SVN using the very thorough cook-book-like
instructions given by Gilles or a partner on the website when I needed
functionality of that latest development release. I can see that a
newb could have trouble there though.

cheers, JD



On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 7:31 AM, Hevï Guy <heviiguy at gmail.com> wrote:
>

> This is the crux: Many of us are mere photographers rather than programming
> experts. I'm sure that I speak for most people in my situation when I say
> that I am very appreciative of the effort that's put into developing this
> great program. However, we're also very frustrated that in order to use it,
> we have to compile not only the core program but also its dependencies.
> Granted, there are instructions available on the DigiKam site but, they are
> somewhat disjointed and incomplete. They take for granted that the
> non-coders will know what is missing and are thus able to fill-in the
> blanks.
>
> I'm not asking to be given something that we can install by the click of one
> button (although it would be nice!). All I'm asking for is that if we have
> to compile a bunch of stuff, a road map (a detailed road map) is provided.
> If anybody is willing to do this, pretend that you're writing it for a two
> year-old child. Then the instructions should be easy enough for us to
> follow. No wait: I'm sure that any two year-old living with a serious coder
> would be more capable than me. A better idea would be to write the
> instructions as if your hamster is to read it.