On 11/30/2017 09:22 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: > On 11/12/2017 11:15 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: >> The fate of SFCGAL in Debian looks grim. The build failure reported in >> #876521 remains unfixed, and there hasn't been any activity in the >> upstream repo since September. The activity before that was worrying low >> then as well. > > There is some activity upstream to work on compatibility with CGAL 4.11, > especially when its built with GMPXX as the Debian package is.  > > Unfortunately this work is not completed yet, and it's unknown when/if > it will be.
This work stalled, and it took 3 months to get CGAL developers involved to fix the GMPXX support in a separate PR. SFCGAL 1.3.3 is now in unstable. >> The SFCGAL support in the postgis package will be disabled when the CGAL >> transitions starts and no fix for #876521 is available. Since SFCGAL is >> not in healthy state upstream, I will follow up on the postgis change by >> having the sfcgal package removed from Debian. > > The CGAL transition started today, so the SFCGAL support in the postgis > package has been disabled. The SFCGAL support in postgis will be re-enabled in the next upload. Because this issue showed clearly that the SFCGAL project is not in good health, I will not enable the support in GDAL. The SFCGAL project will need to improve a lot before I'll consider enabling the support in GDAL. Having to deal with this shit in postgis was unpleasant enough to not want another package in that same situation. > If the SFCGAL build failure remains unfixed in the next few months, I'll > request the removal of the sfcgal package from Debian. > >> If there are people that would like for SFCGAL to remain in Debian, >> please get involved with the upstream project and help fix its worrying >> state. > >  https://github.com/Oslandia/SFCGAL/pull/149 It's only a matter of time until the next issue like this arises, so if you care about SFCGAL please get involved in the upstream project to help make it a project we can rely on. Kind Regards, Bas