[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

gdal: dealing with transitions and embedded libs

On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 00:11, Francesco P. Lovergine
<frankie@debian.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 11:54:55PM +0800, Aron Xu wrote:
>> > OK, so I tried to build it in an up-to-date i386 sid chroot, but it
>> > appears libgdal1-dev in Build-Depends cannot be satisfied because it
>> > depends on libhdf4-alt-dev and libhdf5-seial-dev. libgdal1-dev itself
>> > is depending on the obsolete libjpeg62-dev, and the latter two are
>> > depending on libjpeg-dev, which results into depending on libjpeg8-dev
>> > now. libjpeg62-dev and libjpeg8-dev are conflicts with each other. The
>> > solution is we have to update the package src:gdal first... I'll
>> > prepare a team upload for it to get rid of it from our way.
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Regards,
>> > Aron Xu
>> >
>> Well... I see there is an experimental version of gdal already, but I
>> think I should update the version in unstable first, and let frankie
>> to continue in the future.
> Yep, right. We need to update both 1.7 and 1.8.
> --
> Francesco P. Lovergine

Francesco, I have prepared a version with following changes, but with
some problems to ask for your opinion.

  * Build-Depends on libjpeg-dev in favor of the transition to
libjpeg8-dev. (Closes: #629964)
  * Build-Depends on libpng-dev instead of libpng12-dev.
  * Transition to dh_python2. (Closes: #616821)
  * Standard-Version: 3.9.2.
This will resolve the conflict dependency that getting in our way of
installing libgdal1-dev, (and so building osgearth).

But now embedded-library is a lintian auto-reject, we have to decide
whether to override this warning or link to system libtiff. I noticed
there is already some discussions in #558733, could you please help
with this as you are the actual maintainer?

debdiff and lintian reports attached.


Aron Xu

Attachment: gdal_1.7.3-5.debdiff
Description: Binary data

Attachment: lintian-reports.txt.gz
Description: GNU Zip compressed data

Reply to: