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

Re: netcdf Transition



The netcdf transition has started, because you can only wait so long for
feedback from the Release Team to coordinate the transition.

Starting the netcdf transition had the nice side effect of also getting
to start the gdal transition which was long overdue.

"And there was much rejoicing" :-D

On 30-07-15 14:03, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=netcdf-split-c-f-cxx;users=debian-gis@lists.debian.org

There as still a couple of outstanding issues with patches:

 #793885 minc: FTBFS with netcdf in experimental due to test failure

 #794027 metview: Build dependency on libnetcdf-cxx-legacy-dev required
                  for netcdf transition

 #794040 vtk6: Build dependency on libnetcdf-cxx-legacy-dev required
               for netcdf transition

As mentioned in the netcdf transition bugreport (#791215), I NMUed minc
to ignore the test failure, but the maintainer asked me to cancel the
upload. Because #793885 is an RC issue automatic testing removal will
prevent minc from being a blocker for the migration to testing.

With the recent magics++ (2.24.7-6) upload to unstable, we should be
able to build metview now. I'll NMU it to DELAYED/2 if Alastair doesn't
beat me to it with a proper upload to unstable.

vtk6 has a longstanding problematic transition, I'm not sure if I want
to touch that package. This package also won't be a blocker for the
testing migration, so I'm not too worried about it.

gmt (5.1.2+dfsg1-1) FTBFS with the HDF5 serial variant too, so I need to
look into this issue some more. The patch I wrote for the MPI variant is
apparently not sufficient.

For more information on the netcdf transition refer to the transition
tracker and bugreport:

https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/netcdf.html
https://bugs.debian.org/791215

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


Reply to: