Re: Fwd: Re: gfortran and netcdf transitions
On 08/10/2015 10:52 AM, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
>
>
> On 10/08/2015 09:48, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> On 08/10/2015 10:42 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>>> On 10-08-15 08:45, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
>
>>> I'm not sure if it's wise to start the netcdf transition already, even
>>> though I would prefer to transition to the new netcdf packages instead
>>> of doing a v5 rename. A number of reverse dependencies cannot be built
>>> in unstable because the libdap transition (#791114) hasn't started
>>> yet, so libstdc++6 still breaks the current libdap version in unstable
>>> on which gdal among others (build) depends, and so most GIS package
>>> cannot be built because they (build) depend on gdal. This includes
>>> gmt, ncl & vtk6 that are part of the netcdf transition.
>
>> is there a reason to not start the libdap transition? it's already in
> experimental.
>
> I believe not: I think we should go with libdap now. Its awating an OK
> from the RM team; if there is a problem its with gdal. I've tested a
> libdap build with grads.
you don't need one. It's already granted in their email to debian-devel-announce.
Reply to: