Re: Any progress with FIS GT.M?
Ping?
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 02:30:53PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi Luis,
>
> Ping?
> Any news?
>
> I have not recieved any hints how I could help / test.
>
> Kind regards
>
> Andreas.
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 01:15:39PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > Hi Luis,
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 07:02:00AM -0400, Luis Ibanez wrote:
> > > Yes, there has been a bit more progress.
> >
> > Great.
> >
> > > In Intel 64 bits, it builds the libraries and executables;
> > > while in Intel 32, it builds the libraries but I'm having
> > > trouble with a few (4 or 5) missing symbols when
> > > linking the executables.
> >
> > I guess you discussed this with upstream, right? If yes it might make
> > sense to add links to some mailing list archive or so. That way you
> > might increase the number of eyes looking at the problem.
> >
> > > The debian scripts are updated to use this version 5.5,
> > > by invoking cmake for configuration.
> >
> > Good.
> >
> > > Although in recent messages in the list, I learned that
> > > the debian build system may have a more natural way
> > > of using cmake, than what I put in the 'rules' file:
> > >
> > > override_dh_auto_configure:
> > > cp -a ./$(SRC_EXTRAS_DIR)/* .
> > > cmake .
> > > dh_auto_configure
> >
> > That's OK. I do not know what you mean by "natural way" - we should
> > just gain for a way that works. (By chance yesterday I failed in
> > migrating a cmake based package (seqan) from cdbs to debhelper because
> > cmake was not called with proper options - so there might be some issues
> > with cmake support when using dh.)
> >
> > > What lays ahead:
> > >
> > > 0) Update the Git branch with some recent security
> > > patches from fis-gtm upstream.
> > >
> > > 1) Fix the missing symbols when building
> > > executables in Intel 32 bits.
> > >
> > > 2) Incorporate post-build steps from fis-gtm scripts
> > >
> > > 3) Incorporate installation (final destination)
> > > from fis-gtm scripts
> > >
> > > 4) Put heads together with the upstream team and
> > > look at how they could carry the CMakeLists.txt
> > > files in their source tree, as a parallel configuration
> > > system, as well as vetting the bootstrap-generated
> > > files. We have exchanged emails on this with
> > > Bhaskar.
> >
> > >From my (Debian based) perspective item 1 might be the hardest blocker
> > and we do not have influence on 4. How do you see the chances to get
> > 1) fixed and are you getting help in it?
> >
> > > More brains and hands are very welcome,
> > > to help bring this to completion. :-)
> >
> > If you want me having a look please give a short step by step recipe how
> > to reproduce the problem and a summary of the discussion you had with
> > upstream who might be best qualified to answer questions like this.
> >
> > Kind regards
> >
> > Andreas.
> >
> > --
> > http://fam-tille.de
> >
> >
> > --
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> > Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120424111539.GA30216@an3as.eu
> >
> >
>
> --
> http://fam-tille.de
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> Archive: [🔎] 20120516123052.GA13786@an3as.eu">http://lists.debian.org/[🔎] 20120516123052.GA13786@an3as.eu
>
>
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: