Re: [Pkg-octave-devel] liboctave-dev insists on serial version of the hdf5 library
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:17:32PM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> Do you therefore consider that we should refrain from implementing the
> proposed change, given the potential harm?
Frankly, I don't care that much. If you think it's worth the trouble,
just go ahead. We had a similar solution for years, so we are not doing
something new here.
> My personal opinion is unchanged because in practice buildd currently
> use (almost) clean chroots, and many packages rely on that expectation
> (I think of blas/lapack shlibs system for example). Also, the very same
> solution with HDF5 alternatives did not create miscompilations in the
> squeeze era.
We once had a broken buildd chroot on one architectures. I still don't
know what we did wrong, but an octave build somehow permanently
mis-configured the buildd chroot on one machine. It took *years* to get
this fixed (arguably, buildd maintainers are more reactive these days).
That said, if you don't see anything obvious broken with the current
idea, just go ahead. If we do not try it, we will never know what
breaks.
Thomas
Reply to: