Mike Miller a écrit , Le 04/08/2014 16:40: > On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 11:54:02 +0000, Gilles Filippini wrote: >> Hi Thomas, >> >> Thomas Weber a écrit , Le 04/08/2014 13:09: >>> On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 12:45:03AM +0200, Gilles Filippini wrote: >>>> Source: octave >>>> Version: 3.8.1-3 >>>> Severity: important >>>> Tags: patch >>>> User: p...@debian.org >>>> Usertags: HDF5-transition >>>> >>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>> Hash: SHA256 >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> The hdf5 1.8.13 package in experimental features a new layout for >>>> headers and libraries, so that all the binary packages are now >>>> co-installable. >>> >>> Thanks for moving forward with this. Just some questions >>> 1) Should hdf5-flags.patch ad hdf5-mkoctfile.patch be forwarded to >>> upstream? How Debian-specific >>> are they? >> >> These patches aren't Debian-specific. They help when HDF5 is installed >> into a non standard path. > > Some similar changes to support non-standard HDF5 install paths were > already made upstream some time ago but have not been verified nor > released yet. See upstream bug #38928 [1]. I plan on testing > upstream's development branch with the hdf5 experimental packages to > see whether it is sufficient or whether these patches are also needed. > I'll report back here and on the upstream bug report with my findings. > > [1] http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?38928 > >>> 2) My understanding of the changes to debian/rules is that we are going >>> with the serial HDF5 version here for Octave. What if one wants to use >>> the parallel version in a .oct file (a binary module for Octave)? Will >>> this be possible? >> >> I don't have any knowledge about octave modules. What I can say for sure >> is that the octave binary packages will be tied to the serial version of >> HDF5. But nothing should prevent you to link a module against a parallel >> version of the library. Both instances can coexist into the same >> application now. > > So installing a parallel version of the library will neither hurt nor > help Octave's use of HDF5?
Indeed. > And -dev packages can be co-installed? Yes. This is why the headers and libraries paths changed. > Sounds good to me. Has my patch to hdf5 to bypass the C++ MPI API been > reverted, it sounds like it is no longer needed (and was introduced in > the context of Octave). Yes, I dropped that patch. Thanks, _g.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
