Re: thank you for VTK9 and paraview

[Drew Parsons <dparsons@debian.org>]

Tricky question, hard to be definitive. Certainly you'll want to file a 
bug upstream in any case and maybe they'll get round to sorting it out.

Obviously it'd be nice to have if it's possible to have. Maybe someone 
might be setting up a controller for some instrument with the 
microcontroller based on i386 or armhf to reduce costs, and they want to 
use paraview for some low resolution representation of the data 
collected.

But if we just can't do it, then I think it's not constructive to halt 
the upgrade for the 64-bit arches. i.e. go ahead and drop 32-bit if 
there's no reasonable hope of getting it built.

There's a bit of precedence with this, with packages dependent on CGAL 
(pygalmesh, mshr) not building on all arches.

Drew


On 2020-12-04 20:04, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
> Hi
>
> The latest Paraview breaks on 32 bit architectures. Its breaking both
> on 32/64 bit code issues
> (multiple definitions of int/long prototypes in templates) and memory
> exhaustion in compilation.
>
> Is there much merit in building Paraview for 32-bit platforms or
> should they be dropped?
>
> Alastair
>
> On 30/11/2020, 02:05, "Drew Parsons" <dparsons@debian.org> wrote:
>
>     Hi Anton and Alastair, just a big thank you for getting VTK-9 and
>     paraview updated and packaged.  They've been hard to manage so it's 
> a
>     good work you've done.
>
>     Drew