Re: libhdf4

[Johan Van de Wauw <johan.vandewauw@gmail.com>]

Hello everyone,

In the meantime I've been taking a closer look to this package, and
packaged the new version in git. However I'm still hitting a few
issues and hope someone can give me some advice on how to proceed,
especially since we are closer to the freeze.
The current package will fail to build on arm64 so it will have an RC
bug. In any case it seems better to me to use the new version as a
basis.

What I already did:
* update to version 4.2.10 (fixes build on arm64)
* add a watchfile
* updated the package so it can work with the original sources instead
of a tarball containing the original sources (and a procedure to
create that file). Now uscan can be used to get the source
* Imported and reviewed the changes from ubuntu
* Added autoreconf/libtoolize
* Some other cleanup

Things that still need to be done
* hardening: hardening is not yet applied. I thought they were in the
rules file from doko  but it is not. If I do enable it properly (by
removing the if clauses around them), I get errors building the
testsuite.
* IA64: the upstream changelog mentions that this platform is no
longer available. Unfortunately I could not find a vcs where I could
see what actually changed. We should definitely check if we can still
build on this platform.
* Standards: I still have to check if there are changes needed apart
from bumping the version
* Perhaps something silly: in my build I wanted to do:
cp -a !(debian|HDF$(RELEASE)) HDF$(RELEASE)
but since dash is used this does not work. I used
rsync -a --exclude debian --exclude HDF$(RELEASE) . HDF$(RELEASE)
as an alternative, but that means an extra build dependency
If anyone has a proper alternative without rsync, feel free to change it.

Since libhdf4 is quite architecture dependent I would actually like to
send a package to experimental asap, so at least we know if/where it
FTBFS.

Johan

On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> wrote:
> Hi Johan,
>
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 06:48:28PM +0200, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
>> > Thanks for spotting this. Hopefully you will be able to drain from this
>> > packaging some helpful hints. I admit that I'm really concerned about
>> > these uncoordinated effort at "third places". Please invite the
>> > maintainer of this package to work together with us in Debian GIS
>> > repository. When you do so please make pretty clear that his work will
>> > be regarded nicely and I'm volunteering to sponsor his work to the
>> > official Debian mirror.
>> >
>>
>> Actually the package was made by a debian developer (doko), after sending
>> different patches to the bug tracker.He did actually write a bug report to
>> inform that a new version was there.
>
> To bad that we have given doko another reason to claim that teams in
> general are non-functional. :-(
>
>> I think the main interest of ubuntu was having arm64 ready, I can
>> understand at some point you prefer packaging yourself than keeping up with
>> debian maintainers who don't reply...
>
> Yes.  I really hope that we will perform better in the future.
>
> Kind regards
>
>         Andreas.
>
> --
> http://fam-tille.de
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gis-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140815063030.GB28867@an3as.eu
>