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

Re: osgEarth 2.5



On 02/22/2014 04:22 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 02/22/2014 12:10 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> On 02/21/2014 11:29 PM, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 08:36:17PM +0100, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>>>> QGIS is the only reverse dependency of osgEarth currently. Since qgis
>>>> 2.0.1-2 was only accepted into unstable yesterday, uploading osgEarth
>>>> 2.5 right now seems a bit early.
>>>
>>> Did you consider experimental for uploading? That would allow at 
>>> least find major building issues sooner than later.
>>
>> Uploading at least osgearth to experimental is probably a good idea just
>> to be sure it builds on all other architectures too (except hurd-i386
>> where its build dependencies are unsatisfied because openscenegraph FTBFS).
> 
> Uploading to experimental at least once is also good to collect the
> symbols for the other architectures. So I've updated the package for
> experimental using a more appropriate package version, and requested
> sponsorship (#739732).

The new build dependency on libv8-dev prevents osgEarth 2.5 from being
built on hurd-i386, mips, powerpc, s390x & sparc because libv8-3.14
explicitly excludes them from its architecture list.

Because osgEarth 2.4 was built on all architectures except hurd-i386,
the experimental builds of QGIS 2.2 are now inconsistent. I've added a
versioned build dependency on at least osgearth-dev 2.5.0 to tie the
fate of QGIS 2.2 to osgEarth 2.5 and its build dependencies.

If the qgis builds on the remaining ports succeed, I think we should
upload osgearth 2.5.0+dfsg-1 and qgis 2.2.0-1 to unstable.

Kind Regards,

Bas


Reply to: