Hi François, thanks for working on this!
Yes, those bugs are filed against packages, depending on vtk6 and vtk7. I would firstly recommend finding out, whether the package has a newer version and maybe vtk9 support is provided. If not - it makes sense to contact upstream about migration to vtk9, and only if upstream is dead or not quite active, does it make sense to dive into the code and fix it. Progress on fixing those bugs can be monitored here [1]/ [1] https://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/bts-usertags.cgi?user=gladk%40debian.org&tag=vtk6_vtk7_removal Anton Am Di., 21. Juni 2022 um 22:15 Uhr schrieb François Mazen <franc...@mzf.fr>: > > Hello science team! > > After discussion with Jochen and Andreas, I'm working on removing the > old vtk7 package from the archive, or at least do not build-depends on > it. > The rationale is that vtk7 is old and not maintained upstream anymore. > The current version is vtk9. > Unfortunately, many packages are not ready for the migration because > the way VTK works changed between version 8 and 9, especially on the > CMake side. > > So I've started to update reverse build-depends of libvtk7-dev: cgal- > demo [1], mia [2], nifti2dicom [3], openems [4]... > > I've discovered that similar initiatives are ongoing [5]. I think that > synchronization is needed to avoid duplicate work. > > There is still a lot to do, like camitk, gdcm, vtk-dicom, facet- > analyser, so any contribution is welcome! > > Best Regards, > François > > > [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1012280 > [2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1012689 > [3] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1012691 > [4] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1013190 > [5] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1013158 > >
