Bug#771154: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#771154: plink: New major upstream version of plink

[Steffen Möller]

Much in support of Dylan, please also think about the binary filename of the executable. We had the unfortunate p-link for Version 1 to avoid a clash with one of the putty tools. This was a mistake at the time imho. Shall we correct for that? Or is upstream already defaulting to plink2? This would then give us p-link and plink2 as executables. Hurts.
Cheers,
Steffen
--
Sent from my Android phone with GMX Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

Dylan <bob.dyb...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Andreas,

2014-12-16 15:35 GMT+01:00 Andreas Tille <andr...@an3as.eu>:

For this actual case I wonder whether plink2 would be a drop in
replacement we can provide instead of the old pling (which means the
interface is compatible and the test suite if there is any creates the
same results) or whether you think plink and plink2 should be provided
in parallel.

I recommend to provide both versions of plink for the moment as the first version is always widely used and the interface is not completely compatible, some flags are not supported by the new version. The upstream recommends to use the old plink for these flags. Moreover, the new version is a major update (i.e. many algorithms changes) which could be problematic for replicate some previous results for those using old plink.

I will push the new plink on git.debian.

Best regards,

Dylan

_______________________________________________ Debian-med-packaging mailing list debian-med-packag...@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-med-packaging

-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org