Copying Nico in as cc, as I don't think I have seen him post here. Please Nico, if you read this only once - it would be great if you subscribed to this list as well as the "commit/bug" list so everyone knows what is happening with netcdf (or let me know that you are subscribed). I have been working through some of the old bugs against netcdf and I have noticed a couple of things about the netcdf C package which I have been testing the bugs against: 1. We claim in the changelog that Multi-Arch is enabled, but I am not sure we have done this fully according to https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/advanced.en.html#multiarch We have the files installing to the correct paths, but I can't see the "Multi-Arch" stanzas in d/control. 2. Whilst trying to get backtraces for a couple of "mayhem" bugs in gdb (I will come back separately about this if I don't crack it soon), I noticed the -dbg package does not seem to install the debugging symbols properly (at least gdb does not pick them up automatically with this version of netcdf - but it could be my poor use of gdb). The file list is completely different between 4.3.4 and the old version of the debug package. I am not sure why this is, as the d/rule & d/control looks pretty standard. On 01/17/2015 01:02 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: [...] > The netcdf-cxx & netcdf-fortan packages are mostly ready in git. I > only expect minor changes in the near future. > > ITP: https://bugs.debian.org/775520 > Git: https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/netcdf-cxx.git > > ITP: https://bugs.debian.org/775524 > Git: https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/netcdf-fortran.git > > The netcdf-dbg package should become a transitional package > recommending the C, C++ & Fortran debug packages, and the debugging > symbols for NetCDF C moved to libnetcdf-dbg. > > libCF is still TODO ITP: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=775584 > http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/projects/index.html#libcf > > We may also want to package python-netcdf4, which has a different > source from python-netcdf already in the archive. > > https://github.com/Unidata/netcdf4-python Will do the ITP soon. I have googled around to see what the difference is to the Scientific Python version. It seems that the netcdf-python implements a much wider range of the netcdf functions, so it is definitely worthwhile. Cheers, Ross
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature