cctag: init at 1.0.3

[hesiod]

Description of changes

Add package for the CCTag library.

Links:

• https://cctag.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
• https://github.com/alicevision/CCTag

Depends on PR #215689

Part of an ongoing effort to package Meshroom (#94127). See also #215528 #215728 #216401 #216399

Things done

• Built on platform(s)
  • x86_64-linux
  • aarch64-linux
  • x86_64-darwin
  • aarch64-darwin
• For non-Linux: Is sandbox = true set in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
• Tested, as applicable:
  • NixOS test(s) (look inside nixos/tests)
  • and/or package tests
  • or, for functions and "core" functionality, tests in lib/tests or pkgs/test
  • made sure NixOS tests are linked to the relevant packages
• Tested compilation of all packages that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage
• Tested basic functionality of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
• 23.05 Release Notes (or backporting 22.11 Release notes)
  • (Package updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking
  • (Module updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is significant
  • (Module addition) Added a release notes entry if adding a new NixOS module
• Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

[hesiod]

Waiting for #217585 to land in master

[hesiod]

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 216402 run on x86_64-linux 1

1 package built:

• cctag

[davidak]

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 216402 run on x86_64-linux 1

3 packages built:

• cctag
• cctag.dev
• cctag.lib

[davidak]

Code looks good

Builds, can't test it

[SuperSandro2000]

Suggested change

	outputs = [ "lib" "dev" "out" ];
	outputs = [ "out" "lib" "dev" ];

[hesiod]

Is that really a good idea? cctag.out is empty (it's only included because some hooks complain otherwise). cctag.lib really is the main binary output.
If cctag.lib were to go first, building cctag would default to an empty output which would be somewhat counterintuitive.
Not sure if there are any policies surrounding this other than "binaries should go first"

[hesiod]

@davidak I'm reasonably confident that CI should run fine on Darwin now (let's see in a few minutes).
Please have a look at whether my use of doCheck (disabled on Darwin) in deciding whether to build the tests (in cmakeFlags) is OK. I can't see why not, but I haven't seen similar logic in Nixpkgs yet. But perhaps that's because compile issues that only affect the tests might be rare.