Andreas Tille writes:
> Finally it seems to boil down to change four files of real code
Right, usage is centralized via wrappers, so they'll need extensive
changes but with any luck nothing else should (apart from necessary
build-system adjustments). At any rate, upstream is now open to moving
Hi Aaron,
Am Sun, Dec 04, 2022 at 06:20:15PM -0500 schrieb Aaron M. Ucko:
> Andreas Tille writes:
>
> > it would be great if you could use your upstream contact to convince
> > them to switch to pcre2.
>
> Upstream explicitly passed on pcre2 a few years ago, but times have
> changed; I've opene
Andreas Tille writes:
> it would be great if you could use your upstream contact to convince
> them to switch to pcre2.
Upstream explicitly passed on pcre2 a few years ago, but times have
changed; I've opened an internal ticket to revisit the question.
--
Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (amu at alum.mit
Hi Aaron,
it would be great if you could use your upstream contact to convince
them to switch to pcre2.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Laurent Bigonville writes:
> Any reasons why it still depending on the old version?
That's the only version it actually supports. Yes, it's possible to
build ncbi-blast+ with libpcre2-dev present and libpcre-dev absent --
but that's only because it falls back on a convenience copy of libpcre
wh
Package: ncbi-blast+
Version: 2.7.1-1+b1
Severity: normal
Hi,
I see that ncbi-blast+ package supports both (old) pcre and (new) pcre2
library.
Any reasons why it still depending on the old version? Shouldn't
it be switched to the new (pcre2) one?
Kind regards,
Laurent Bigonville
-- System Inf
6 matches
Mail list logo