In related work, I've been preparing co-installable netcdf (serial, mpi, pnetcdf) on the branch dev-coinstallable. It still needs more testing (especially symbols lists), and to be merged with 4.4.1 changes; it would not require a transition except that it renames : libnetcdf11 -> libnetcdf-11 because other packages have: libnetcdf-mpi-11 (linked against default mpi, typically openmpi) libnetcdf-pnetcdf-11 I switched to this convention because other mpi-related packages do so, eg. libhdf5-openmpi-8 I suspect this is because the mpi variant may also have a version number included, eg. libhdf5-mpich2-8 I'm not fixated on this namechange either way, what does everyone think? If we were to go with the name change, this would be a good time to do it. Regards Alastair On 17/04/2016 10:50, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: > NetCDF 4.4.1-rc1 was released two days ago and is the first release > which will write backwards-compatible netCDF4 files properly when linked > against HDF5 1.10.0.  > > Since both NetCDF 4.4.1 and HDF5 1.10.0 are in NEW, and will require a > transition in unstable, it's probably best to transition to NetCDF 4.4.1 > before starting the transition to HDF5 1.10.0, otherwise we'll have a > netcdf/hdf5 combination in Debian (and possibly synced into Ubuntu) that > creates backwards-incompatible files in the time until the netcdf > transition is started. > > Gilles, what are your thoughts about this? > >  https://github.com/Unidata/netcdf-c/issues/250 > > Kind Regards, > > Bas > > > -- > Alastair McKinstry, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, https://diaspora.sceal.ie/u/amckinstry > Misentropy: doubting that the Universe is becoming more disordered.
Description: OpenPGP digital signature