On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 10:47:26AM -0700, Tracey Emery wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 06:03:38PM +0100, Paco Esteban wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, 12 Nov 2020, Tracey Emery wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 05:17:02PM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > > > On 2020/11/12 09:58, Tracey Emery wrote:
> > > > > Hello ports,
> > > > >
> > > > > Attached is a new port, cad/dxf2gcode.
> > > > >
> > > > > DXF2GCODE is a tool for converting 2D (dxf, pdf, ps) drawings to CNC
> > > > > machine compatible GCode.
> > > > >
> > > > > This port adds functionality to packages like qcad, for CNC millers
> > > > > like
> > > > > me, to be able to take a 2D project all the way to the CNC mill,
> > > > > instead
> > > > > of just print.
> > > > >
> > > > > The user can select each path and select all the drills, mills, and
> > > > > limits for that path.
> > > > >
> > > > > I've run this against a qcad created dxf on amd64 and the output gcode
> > > > > looks good to me. I haven't taken it to mill yet, well, since the
> > > > > project isn't ready. :D
> > > > >
> > > > > Comments? Ok to import?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > >
> > > > > Tracey Emery
> > > >
> > > > Some of the plist entries look a bit problematic,
> > > >
> > > > lib/python${MODPY_VERSION}/site-packages/easy-install.pth
> > > > lib/python${MODPY_VERSION}/site-packages/site.py
> > > >
> > > > I'm not sure what to do with this off-hand though...
> > > >
> > > > Could you try something like this instead of patching for the -3 suffix
> > > > please? It will be easier to handle when we get rid of the py27 py-qt5.
> > > >
> > > > .for i in pyuic pyrcc pylupdate
> > > > ln -s ${LOCALBASE}/bin/$i5${MODPY_BIN_SUFFIX} ${WRKDIR}/bin/$i5
> > > > .endfor
> > >
> > > Attached is a new port with your -3 workaround. Thanks.
> > >
> > > For easy-install.pth and site.py, I just commented them out in PLIST.
> > > The executable doesn't appear to need them in any way, as I was able to
> > > do everything I did in my first test.
> > >
> > > Any python people that can say if this is the right way to go about
> > > these two files? Otherwise, the only other way I can think to handle
> > > those is with:
> > >
> > > do-install:
> > > mkdir -p ${WRKINST}${MODPY_SITEPKG}/${DISTNAME}
> > > cd ${WRKSRC} && ${MAKE_ENV} \
> > > PYTHONPATH=${WRKINST}${MODPY_SITEPKG} ${MODPY_BIN} \
> > > ./st-setup.py install --prefix=${PREFIX}
> > > mv ${WRKINST}${MODPY_SITEPKG}/site.py \
> > > ${WRKINST}${MODPY_SITEPKG}/${DISTNAME}
> > > ${MODPY_BIN} ${MODPY_LIBDIR}/compileall.py \
> > > ${WRKINST}${MODPY_SITEPKG}/${DISTNAME}/site.py
> > > mv ${WRKINST}${MODPY_SITEPKG}/easy-install.pth \
> > > ${WRKINST}${MODPY_SITEPKG}/${DISTNAME}
> > >
> > > Thoughts? Ok to import?
> >
> > Here's an updated version with another patch for the "sys.platform"
> > stuff. This makes the default folders on the configuration more unix
> > like.
>
> Ah, good catch. Thanks.
>
> >
> > I cannot find the "site.py" or "easy-install.pth" on my build, is this
> > maybe a build env problem ? (I had those in the past).
>
> Stu has some reservations about the location of those files, so I
> commented them out, as they don't appear to be needed by the resulting
> binary. There is an option to keep them above, but was waiting for
> py-people to comment on the proper course here. With the above
> do-install, they will be installed a proper directory. So, are they
> needed?
>
> I'm not a py-person, so I can't answer. I just want to use the software.
> :)
>
> >
> > For the rest, I tested it on amd64 and looks good to me. Unfortunately
> > I don't have any CNC handy to test, so I guess that's ok paco@
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > --
> > Paco Esteban.
> > 0x5818130B8A6DBC03
>
>
>
> --
>
> Tracey Emery
So, if no other py-folks chime in, I'm going to import this as is
tomorrow. Thanks.
--
Tracey Emery
