Re: Please review ncbi-vdb

[Andreas Tille <tille@debian.org>]

Hi Aaron,

Am Sat, Feb 26, 2022 at 10:48:29PM -0500 schrieb Aaron M. Ucko:
> Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> writes:
> 
> > I managed the packaging now at the state where it builds binary packages
> > that are technically basically OK from a Debian point of view (one RPATH
> > issue left).  Aaron, I would love if you could give it a review with
> > your specialist hat on.
> 
> Great, thanks!  I'll review the result when I get a chance.
> 
> > I have no idea whether it makes sense to split up the libraries.
> 
> Don't worry, it definitely does -- I anticipate it will sooner or later
> be common, if not typical, to need only libncbi-vdb.

If you think the package structure is OK I might upload to new.
Any other fine tuning that might be needed could be done in some
source-only upload.
 
> > Please also check whether we should keep the Architecture restriction
> > to certain architectures or whether cmake now enables us to simply use
> > "any".
> 
> Last I checked, the CMake setup had some architecture-specific logic
> that would call for not only keeping but tightening the restriction, by
> dropping i386.  We could perhaps attempt to reinstate i386 support, but
> I'm not sure it's worth the effort nowadays.
> 
> > I'd really welcome some sensible autopkgtest which could prevent me
> > making mistakes in future.
> 
> I've found sra-toolkit's to be a fairly effective stand-in, but a
> dedicated autopkgtest certainly wouldn't hurt.

I absolutely agree ... but I have no idea about a test.  We might
re-use the build time test partly.  Or can you get some hints from
upstream?

> > PS: Please note that I'm on vacation next week and will not do anything
> >     on this package in the next 10 days.
> 
> Enjoy your vacation!

:-)

Kind regards

     Andreas. 

-- 
http://fam-tille.de