On 08/10/2015 10:42 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: > On 10-08-15 08:45, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
> I'm not sure if it's wise to start the netcdf transition already, even > though I would prefer to transition to the new netcdf packages instead > of doing a v5 rename. A number of reverse dependencies cannot be built > in unstable because the libdap transition (#791114) hasn't started > yet, so libstdc++6 still breaks the current libdap version in unstable > on which gdal among others (build) depends, and so most GIS package > cannot be built because they (build) depend on gdal. This includes > gmt, ncl & vtk6 that are part of the netcdf transition. is there a reason to not start the libdap transition? it's already in experimental. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: https://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
