Re: PostGIS 2.2.0 and API/ABI breakage in trunk
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
On 10-10-15 11:32, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 10-10-15 11:30, Markus Wanner wrote:
>> Two questions regarding the current packaging: Shouldn't #788092
>> get closed with >=2.2.0?
>
> Yes.
We may need to reopen that issue, sfcgal is currently broken in
unstable because it doesn't support CGAL 4.7.0:
https://github.com/Oslandia/SFCGAL/issues/113
If we cannot get sfcgal to work with CGAL 4.7.0 we'll need to disable
its use in postgis.
>> Should we add a '--with-sfcgal' when invoking configure, so it
>> catches some errors (rather than silently result in a build w/o
>> sfcgal)?
>
> Not strictly required, and another change you need to undo for
> pgApt. So I'll leave that up to you.
>
> When SFCGAL support is not enabled automatically we'll notice that
> by the removed symbols, so it's unlikely to cause silent breakage.
>
> Regarding SFCGAL support, it's a good thing we need to wait for
> NEW processing again, because we should get sfcgal (1.2.0-1) into
> unstable before we move postgis (2.2.x-1) to unstable too.
Because we cannot build sfcgal (1.2.0-1) with cgal (4.7-3), getting it
into unstable is problematic.
Kind Regards,
Bas
- --
GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146 50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2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=hace
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: