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

Re: dcmtkpp 0.3.1

Hi Andreas,

Le 08/10/2015 23:40, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> Hi Julien,
> On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 05:22:33PM +0200, Julien Lamy wrote:
>> Hello,
>> I have updated dcmtk++'s repository [1] with the latest upstream
>> version. This release includes new features (native reading and writing
>> of DICOM files and generation of DICOMDIR files) as well as bugfixes. It
>> builds in a cowbuilder and lintian finds no error nor warning.
>> Andreas, would you consider this update for upload?
> I would happily sponsor but I'm running into errors:
> ...
> cd /build/dcmtkpp-0.3.1/build/tests && /usr/bin/c++   -DBOOST_TEST_DYN_LINK -g -O2 -fstack-protector-strong -Wformat -Werror=format-security -std=c++0x -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2  -I/build/dcmtkpp-0.3.1/tests/../src    -D HAVE_CONFIG_H -D DCMTKPP_MAJOR_VERSION=0 -o CMakeFiles/xml_converter.dir/code/xml_converter.cpp.o -c /build/dcmtkpp-0.3.1/tests/code/xml_converter.cpp
> In file included from /usr/include/boost/property_tree/detail/xml_parser_utils.hpp:15:0,
>                  from /usr/include/boost/property_tree/detail/xml_parser_write.hpp:15,
>                  from /usr/include/boost/property_tree/xml_parser.hpp:15,
>                  from /build/dcmtkpp-0.3.1/tests/code/xml_converter.cpp:6:
> /usr/include/boost/property_tree/detail/xml_parser_writer_settings.hpp: In instantiation of 'class boost::property_tree::xml_parser::xml_writer_settings<char>':
> /build/dcmtkpp-0.3.1/tests/code/xml_converter.cpp:900:65:   required from here
> /usr/include/boost/property_tree/detail/xml_parser_writer_settings.hpp:38:35: error: 'char' is not a class, struct, or union type
>   typedef typename Str::value_type Ch;
>                                    ^

This error (and all others) is caused by an API change in the version
1.56 of Boost. I added the patch and the package now builds correctly on
an up-to-date pbuilder.

Thanks for the error report!


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: