On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 20:10:17 -0600, Steve M. Robbins wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 03:01:12PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > I guess the best would be to reintroduce them but as part of a separate
> > libhdf5-cpp-7 binary package (the reason I dropped them was that they
> > were in libhdf5-7 but not in the mpi variants, which meant the mpi
> > variants didn't really "Provide" libhdf5-7).
> Maybe.  However, there are already four variants of C bindings:
> serial, mpich2, openmpi, and default "mpi".  Splitting C++ libraries
> would mean doubling this to 8.
> Why is that better than simply reactiving C++ (for all variants)?
First because having more than one shared lib per binary package is a
recipe for trouble down the road.  Second, the c++ libs were only built
with the serial libhdf5 variant, not with any of the mpi ones; I don't
know why, and am not familiar enough with hdf5 to know if that makes any


Pkg-grass-devel mailing list

Reply via email to