Re: [Ubuntu] Does UbuntuGIS select/package for universe?

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg via Ubuntu]

On 1/16/24 13:38, Thomas Larsen Wessel via Ubuntu wrote:

Thanks. So just to be clear, could you please confirm the following?

The UbuntuGIS plays no role in selecting or packaging anything for the
standard universe archives.


Correct.

My experience with packages in the Ubuntu universe archives are that 
they effectively unmaintained, not enough MOTUs to act on the 
bugreports, prepare stable updates, etc.


Kind Regards,

Bas

--
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Does UbuntuGIS select/package for universe?

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg via Ubuntu]

On 1/14/24 20:49, Thomas Larsen Wessel via Ubuntu wrote:

I took this to mean that the UbuntuGIS team has been delegated the job of
selecting and packaging the GIS-related packages that will be made
available through the official Ubuntu universe archives. Is that the case?


No. UbuntuGIS backports packages from Debian for Ubuntu LTS releases.

See also: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuGIS#UbuntuGIS_FAQ

These days the backporting work tends to happen for OSGeoLive and then 
copied to UbuntuGIS.


Kind Regards,

Bas

--
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] [DKIM] Additional grass dependencies

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 7/12/23 09:13, Luí s Moreira de Sousa wrote:

on which statistics you base the assertion that add-ons have low usage? 
Gathering from the activity at Gitter and the maillist I would conclude the 
opposite.


popcon of course.

grass-core has 524 votes,
grass-dev has 10 votes.

If extension were used more, grass-dev would have more votes.


On Widows the packaging systems aim to include all dependencies. This can be a 
challenge with programmes like Git, but remains a goal in that community. See 
for instance this recent discussion on 8.3:
https://github.com/OSGeo/grass/issues/3077


Windows is irrelevant for the Debian package.


As it is currently distributed from UbuntuGIS, g.extension fails with an 
exception. Even to just list available add-ons.
That suggests an issue specific to the package in UbuntuGIS, listing the 
add-ons works fine in a Debian unstable chroot with only grass installed 
where g.extension suggests installing git:


 # grass --exec g.extension -l
 Default locale settings are missing. GRASS running with C locale.
 ERROR: 'git' required. Please install 'git' first.

After installing git & ca-certificates it works as expected:

 # grass --exec g.extension -l
 Default locale settings are missing. GRASS running with C locale.
 List of available extensions (modules):
 d.explanation.plot
 [...]
 wx.wms

Kind Regards,

Bas

--
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] [DKIM] Additional grass dependencies

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 7/6/23 16:16, Luí s Moreira de Sousa wrote:

Grass requires the packages subversion and grass-dev to install extensions. 
Would it make sense to add them as dependencies to the grass package itself? At 
least subversion would come handy.


grass already suggests grass-dev, it's not a hard dependency on purpose.

grass-dev in turn already recommends subversion.

g.extension also documents this:

"
 TROUBLESHOOTING

 Since extensions have to be compiled on Unix based systems (Linux, Mac
 OSX etc.) unless a Python extension is installed, a full compiler
 environment must be present on the user's computer.

 ERROR: Please install GRASS development package

 While GRASS GIS is available on the user's computer, the respective
 development package is lacking. If GRASS was installed from a (Linux)
 repository, also the grass-dev* package (commonly named "grass-dev" or
 "grass-devel", sometimes along with the version number) must be
 installed.
"
https://grass.osgeo.org/grass82/manuals/g.extension.html#troubleshooting

Most users don't use g.extension, so they don't need to have grass-dev 
installed the ones that do should follow these instructions.


Kind Regards,

Bas

--
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] An unstable jammy question

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 11/25/22 22:12, DeTracey, Brendan wrote:

I was guided here by replies to my question on the Ubuntu forums 
[https://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2481256=14120442#post14120442].
Could someone please tell me the appropriate ubuntugis PPA for Jammy? Is it now 
[https://launchpad.net/~ubuntugis/+archive/ubuntu/ubuntugis-unstable]?


Yes, you need the unstable PPA for jammy.


Why is this the case for what is the current stable Ubuntu LTS? Is it a 
resource issue? I am unfamiliar to this.


Packages get copied from the unstable PPA to the stable PPA every once 
in a while similar to how packages transition from unstable to stable in 
Debian.


There is also a lack of contributors to UbuntuGIS.

Kind Regards,

Bas

--
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] ubuntugis-unstable: gdal_merge.py missing? [PYTHON]PATH to be set?

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/29/21 12:18, Martin Weis wrote:

Am 28.10.21 um 12:42 schrieb Sebastiaan Couwenberg:

But that's incorrect, it should be: swig/python/gdal-utils/scripts/*.py

The fix was just pushed and will be included in the next 3.3.3 upload
for Debian.


WOW - thank you so much for the immediate response and fix!


This will need to be cherry-picked for the UbuntuGIS packages if they
won't switch to 3.3.3 soon.


Is there any issue to be opened, or anything else I could help with?


Angelos will include the change in the package for UbuntuGIS is 
mentioned on this list:


 https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/ubuntu/2021-October/001989.html


Most important thing is solved (code, tech), now some processes may need
some investments?


About the only thing that could have prevented this issue is having more 
people review gdal packaging changes.


The upcoming switch to CMake in GDAL 3.4 is a good time to re-evaluate 
much of the custom packaging rules and whether to keep that or rely on 
the buildsystem to do the right thing. A lot of these customizations 
stem from having to build gdal for more than only Python version. Now 
that python2 is EOL, we could decide to only support a single one like 
was done for mapserver. That way there may not be any need for 
buildsystem hacks, reducing the risk of bugs like this one.


Kind Regards,

Bas

--
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] ubuntugis-unstable: gdal_merge.py missing? [PYTHON]PATH to be set?

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

From the migration guide:

"
- "gdal/swig/python/scripts" moved to: 
"gdal/swig/python/gdal-utils/scripts"

"

See: https://github.com/OSGeo/gdal/blob/v3.3.2/gdal/MIGRATION_GUIDE.TXT

gdal_merge.py is one of those scripts:

 $ find . -name "*gdal_merge*"
 ./swig/python/gdal-utils/osgeo_utils/gdal_merge.py
 ./swig/python/gdal-utils/scripts/gdal_merge.py
 ./man/man1/gdal_merge.1

These are manually installed in d/rules, see:


https://salsa.debian.org/debian-gis-team/gdal/-/blob/debian/3.2.2+dfsg-2/debian/rules#L193

This was changed for 3.3, see:


https://salsa.debian.org/debian-gis-team/gdal/-/blob/debian/3.3.2+dfsg-2/debian/rules#L196

But that's incorrect, it should be: swig/python/gdal-utils/scripts/*.py

The fix was just pushed and will be included in the next 3.3.3 upload 
for Debian.



https://salsa.debian.org/debian-gis-team/gdal/-/commit/84b9edd2ccc8bd28a4098ce913981de321554cfa

This will need to be cherry-picked for the UbuntuGIS packages if they 
won't switch to 3.3.3 soon.


Kind Regards,

Bas

--
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

[Ubuntu] Help with installing this PPA

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 1/22/21 11:41 PM, Matthew Kratochvil wrote:
> Hello
> 
> I tried to email you but It was rejected twice

You likely need to subscribe to the mailinglist.

>, so I am trying this way
> of communication. My name is Matt K and I am a master's student at LSU
> interested in using your ubuntugis packages. I am using Ubuntu 20.04 to
> install the software from your ppa.
> 
> I am running into issues with retrieving the package from the
> repository. I have tried both the stable and unstable versions, and I
> keep getting the same error.
> 
> Err:8 http://ppa.launchpad.net/ubuntugis/ppa/ubuntu focal Release
>   404  Not Found [IP: 2001:67c:1560:8008::19 80]
> 
> I have tried to run this from different wireless routers and wired
> connections to no avail
> 
> Can you help me?

There are no packages for focal in the stable PPA, see:

 https://launchpad.net/~ubuntugis/+archive/ubuntu/ppa/+packages

There are packages for focal in the unstable PPA, see:

 
https://launchpad.net/~ubuntugis/+archive/ubuntu/ubuntugis-unstable/+packages?field.series_filter=focal

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Contributing to UbuntuGIS

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 7/16/20 3:57 PM, Luí s Moreira de Sousa wrote:
> How do you manage the debian contol files? Can I use them? Or would there be 
> a different way to start?

Have a look at the Debian GIS team policy which documents the procedure
to create backports:

 https://debian-gis-team.pages.debian.net/policy/packaging.html#git-backports

Note that due to lack of contributors most packages are copied from the
OSGeoLive PPA where most of the packaging works happens at the moment.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Release file missing from Stable repository

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 5/24/20 4:51 PM, Luí s Moreira de Sousa wrote:
> I just upgraded one of my systems to Ubuntu 20.04. In the process all GIS 
> software was removed, as so the PPA from the sources. As I added back the PPA 
> I got the message below, complaining of a missing Release file. Could you 
> please check it out?

There are no packages for focal in the PPA yet, see:

 https://launchpad.net/~ubuntugis/+archive/ubuntu/ppa/+packages

Even ubuntugis-unstable only has gdal, grass & libgdal-grass.

For the time being you should stick to the GIS packages in focal, they
are pretty recent.

If you need PROJ 7, you should consider getting involved helping
maintain the packages in the PPA.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Postgis not install issue

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 5/15/20 9:39 AM, Mensio Federico wrote:
> I've removed postgres 12 and installed from apt.postgresql.org postgres 10.

You're still using multiple PPAs.

> However when I try to install postgis from qgis.org/ubuntugis-ltr but the
> problem is the same.
The apt.postgresql.org PPA and qgis.org repo with ubuntugis dependencies
are incompatible.

UbuntuGIS has a newer gdal for which the postgis package in
apt.postgresql.org has been not rebuilt.

You need to remove/disable the apt.postgresql.org PPA.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Postgis not install issue

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 5/14/20 8:49 PM, Mensio Federico wrote:
> On ubuntu 18.04 i've installed postgresql 12 and Qgis via ubuntugis
> unstable-ltr Repo.

postgresql-12 is not in the ubuntugis-unstable.

The ubuntugis PPAs use the default postgresql in Ubuntu, for bionic
that's postgresql-10.

> How can I solve it?

Don't use multiple PPAs.

Either get newer postgresql & postgis from apt.postgresql.org and don't
use ubuntugis (for newer gdal and other packges), or get postgis from
ubuntugis for the default postgresql and have newer gdal and related
packages.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] focal package naming

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 5/9/20 9:01 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> recently I uploaded libgdal-grass (3.0.4-1~focal1) to UbuntuGIS Expr
> [1]. But current package in Ubuntu 20.04 is determined as newer
> (libgdal-grass 3.0.4-1build1) [2]. How to deal with that?

Backport 3.0.4-2 (as 3.0.4-2~focal1) to have a higher version.

You can also increment the final digit (-1build2) or append +focal1 or
+ppa1.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] cowbuilder fails for Ubuntu 20.04 Focal

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 5/2/20 5:31 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> so 2. 5. 2020 v 6:20 odesílatel Sebastiaan Couwenberg napsal:
>> You can use --aptcache=/var/cache/pbuilder/aptcache/ to override the
>> pbuilderrc as documented in the pbuilder(8) manpage, but you shouldn't
>> have a per chroot apt cache configured in the pbuilderrc.
> 
> this point I do not understand. Is it recommended to have a single
> aptcache used by more chroots (bionic, focal) or separated as defined
> at [1].

Per chroot apt cache is generally not needed because the files are
unique thanks to the version encoded in the filename
(__.deb). On my systems I have
/var/cache/pbuilder/aptcache used for 36 different chroots, both Debian
& Ubuntu.

If you use badly managed PPAs that re-use the same version for different
builds of the same package, then a per chroot apt cache can help. But
that's just a workaround, fixing the practices of the package in
question is the solution.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] cowbuilder fails for Ubuntu 20.04 Focal

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 5/2/20 5:28 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> so 2. 5. 2020 v 17:24 odesílatel Martin Landa  napsal:
>> but not for focal.
> 
> After creating the folder [...] I am able to run cowbuilder. Great.

You shouldn't have to. As I wrote before:

"
 You can use --aptcache=/var/cache/pbuilder/aptcache/ to override the
 pbuilderrc as documented in the pbuilder(8) manpage, but you shouldn't
 have a per chroot apt cache configured in the pbuilderrc.
"

I would remove the APTCACHE config from ~/.pbuilderrc and the
documentation. Or if you insist on keep the per chroot cache, document
the need to create the directory when creating a new choot in the linked
wiki.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] cowbuilder fails for Ubuntu 20.04 Focal

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 5/1/20 10:16 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> I am trying to create chroot environment by
> 
> export DIST=focal
> sudo -E cowbuilder --create --distribution=$DIST
> --basepath=/var/cache/pbuilder/base-${DIST}-ubuntugis-unstable.cow
> --save-after-login

This mostly works on Debian unstable:

 sudo cowbuilder \
  --create \
  --distribution=focal \
  --basepath=/var/cache/pbuilder/base-focal-ubuntugis-unstable.cow \
  --hookdir=/var/cache/pbuilder/hook.d/ \
  --mirror=http://nl.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ \
  --othermirror="deb [ trusted=yes ]
http://ppa.launchpad.net/ubuntugis/ubuntugis-unstable/ubuntu focal main" \
  --components="main universe"

That's how the Debian GIS Team policy documents the setup:

 
https://debian-gis-team.pages.debian.net/policy/packaging.html#git-build-backport-chroot

But it fails to setup the other mirror because there are no focal
packages in the PPA yet:

 Err:5 http://ppa.launchpad.net/ubuntugis/ubuntugis-unstable/ubuntu
focal/main amd64 Packages
  404  Not Found [IP: 2001:67c:1560:8008::15 80]

It fails on buster with:

 E: No such script: /usr/share/debootstrap/scripts/focal

> in order to build GRASS 7.8.3RC2 also for Ubuntu 20.04. But the
> command is failing with
>
> E: /var/cache/pbuilder/focal/aptcache/: No such directory
> E: debootstrap failed
>
> Any idea how to fix this? Thanks, Martin

Check your ~/.pbuilderrc and /etc/pbuilderrc, by default it uses
/var/cache/pbuilder/aptcache/ which is shared by all chroots.

You can use --aptcache=/var/cache/pbuilder/aptcache/ to override the
pbuilderrc as documented in the pbuilder(8) manpage, but you shouldn't
have a per chroot apt cache configured in the pbuilderrc.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] ZSTD support in UbuntuGIS?

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 4/10/20 6:31 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 4/10/20 12:36 AM, Richard Sharp wrote:
>> I am using the 3.0.4 version of GDAL installed from the
>> https://launchpad.net/~ubuntugis/+archive/ubuntugis-unstable PPA in a
>> Docker container and see that the gdal installation does not include ZSTD
>> support.
> 
> That's not what the build logs says:
> 
>   ZSTD support:  yes
> 
> https://launchpadlibrarian.net/468243097/buildlog_ubuntu-bionic-amd64.gdal_3.0.4+dfsg-1~bionic0_BUILDING.txt.gz
> 
>> Is it possible for me to somehow enable ZSTD support in a >=3.0.4
>> version of GDAL? I worry this is a naive question but I am not familiar
>> with how GDAL supports various codecs.
> 
> How did you determine that it lacked the support?

It seems that GDAL only uses ZSTD for TIFF, since gdal uses the tiff
package instead of the embedded copy, ZSTD needs to be enabled in tiff.

Zstandard support was enabled in tiff (4.0.9+git181026-1), this change
is present in Debian buster, but not in Ubuntu xenial which has tiff
(4.0.9-5) which is two revision before ZSTD support was enabled.

Ubuntu focal is scheduled for release on the 23rd, upgrading to that
seems like a good option to have a more recent GIS stack.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] ZSTD support in UbuntuGIS?

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 4/10/20 12:36 AM, Richard Sharp wrote:
> I am using the 3.0.4 version of GDAL installed from the
> https://launchpad.net/~ubuntugis/+archive/ubuntugis-unstable PPA in a
> Docker container and see that the gdal installation does not include ZSTD
> support.

That's not what the build logs says:

  ZSTD support:  yes

https://launchpadlibrarian.net/468243097/buildlog_ubuntu-bionic-amd64.gdal_3.0.4+dfsg-1~bionic0_BUILDING.txt.gz

> Is it possible for me to somehow enable ZSTD support in a >=3.0.4
> version of GDAL? I worry this is a naive question but I am not familiar
> with how GDAL supports various codecs.

How did you determine that it lacked the support?

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] PostGIS3 conflicts with GDAL

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 4/6/20 3:50 PM, Jakob Miksch wrote:
> Just to make sure that I understand correctly:
> Ubuntu 18.04 with ubuntugis-unstable should only work safely with
> PostgreSQL 10. It is rather incompatible with PostgreSQL 12.
> 
> Is that right?

Not entirely.

The postgis package for bionic in ubuntugis-unstable is only built
with/for postgresql-10 in bionic, hence its postgresql-10-postgis-3
binary package only works with postgresql-10.

pgapt builds its postgis package for bionic with several postgresql
versions, but it uses the gdal version (and its dependencies) from
bionic which are older version than those in ubuntugis-unstable.

gdal-data from ubuntugis-unstable is incompatible with gdal from bionic
itself as it has been updated to work with PROJ 6.

Hence you need to choose to use packages that have been built with the
gdal (and related packages) from bionic itself (like those in pgapt), or
those that have been built with the version in ubuntugis-unstable (which
only builds for the postgresql version in bionic).

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] PostGIS3 conflicts with GDAL

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 4/3/20 6:02 PM, Jakob Miksch wrote:
> Any hints how to fix that?

Don't use both apt.postgresql.org & ubuntugis PPAs?

If that's not the case, postgis in the UbuntuGIS PPA needs to be rebuilt
for the gdal transition.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] qgis 3.10.3: undefined reference to `openpty'

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 3/24/20 10:55 AM, Martin Landa wrote:
> Hi Angelos,
> 
> st 18. 3. 2020 v 9:49 odesílatel Angelos Tzotsos  
> napsal:
>> About Salsa, yes, I need to find some time to get used to the process
> 
> I hope that some recipes from
> https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/DebianUbuntuPackaging could help.

The git packaging workflow is documented in the team policy:

 https://debian-gis-team.pages.debian.net/policy/packaging.html#git-packaging

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

[Ubuntu] MapServer 7.4.4 Security release

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

MapServer 7.4.4 has been released, this is a security release that fixes
PHPMapScript vulnerabilities in error handling, see:

 https://github.com/mapserver/mapserver/issues/6014

Fixed packages have been uploaded to Debian unstable & buster-backports,
the package in UbuntuGIS needs to be updated too.

Note that it only affects php-mapscript, not php-mapscript-ng. So if
that isn't built, like it is in for 7.2 in buster for example, there is
no urgency to update the package.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] qgis 3.10.3: undefined reference to `openpty'

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 3/16/20 9:23 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> Any idea?
Not enough context.

Make sure you're not on xenial which is not supported any more.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Where is gdal_edit

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 3/10/20 7:05 PM, Luí­s Moreira de Sousa wrote:
> Perhaps it is my friend, but it can't bring back the missing
> executable or symlink. It can't correct man pages either.

$ dpkg-deb -c /tmp/python-gdal_2.4.2+dfsg-1~bionic0_amd64.deb | \
  grep bin/gdal_edit
-rwxr-xr-x root/root 12579 2019-07-14 16:00 ./usr/bin/gdal_edit.py

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Where is gdal_edit

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 3/10/20 4:38 PM, Luí­s Moreira de Sousa wrote:
> Is it in some other package?  Or is it missing?

`apt-file search gdal_edit` is your friend..

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] 19.10 Packages

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 3/6/20 6:47 PM, Bennett Kanuka wrote:
> Are there any plans to release packages for Ubuntu 19.10 Eoan?

No, only LTS releases are supported.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Changing email preference away from 'Each member individually'

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 1/18/20 10:51 PM, Jürgen E. Fischer wrote:
> On Sat, 18. Jan 2020 at 13:11:00 +0100, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> That message may have ended up in the moderation queue.
> 
> ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org was confirmed.

Excellent, thanks!

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Changing email preference away from 'Each member individually'

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 1/17/20 12:23 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 12/17/19 6:54 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> It's very annoying to get messages from Launchpad users sent to the
>> individual members of ~ubuntugis.
>>
>> The email preference cannot currently be changed to
>> ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org because that's associated with the defunct
>> ~ubuntu-lists users.
>>
>> I tried to claim that team, but there was no message sent to this list.
>> So I filed an issue instead:
>>
>>  https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/687212
>>
>> Hopefully we can fix the email preference with the help of LP admins.
> 
> We finally got feedback:
> 
> "
>  OK, I've just talked to a colleague about how to arrange this, because
>  it's a bit weird.  What we'll need to do is as follows:
> 
>  * You should follow "Is this a team you run?" on
>https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-lists, and then use the token emailed
>to ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org to convert it into a team.  (If it's a
>moderated mailing list that you moderate, feel free to fish the token
>out of the moderation interface rather than letting it reach the
>mailing list archives.)
>  * Once it's been converted to a team, let us know and we can merge it
>into ~ubuntugis.
> "
> 
> The token is likely stuck in the moderation queue.
> 
> @jlarouche, can you get it out?
> 
> Does anyone else have the password for the list administration?

With jef's help we managed to convert ~ubuntu-lists into a team and one
of the LP admins merged it into ~ubuntugis.

Changing the the email preferneces for ~ubuntugis shows:

"
 A confirmation message has been sent to 'ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org'.
 Follow the instructions in that message to confirm the new contact
 address for this team. (If the message doesn't arrive in a few minutes,
 your mail provider might use 'greylisting', which could delay the
 message for up to an hour or two.)
"

That message may have ended up in the moderation queue.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] [SAC] Changing email preference away from 'Each member individually'

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 1/17/20 2:11 PM, Jürgen E. Fischer wrote:
> On Fri, 17. Jan 2020 at 13:33:23 +0200, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
>> Reaching out to SAC (in CC) to get access to that mailing list admin
>> interface.
> 
> There are 10 held mails, but the last one is from 2017.
> 
> There queued mail to ubuntu on osgeo6 either.  Any idea when or where from 
> that
> mail should have come?

Today, shortly before I sent my mail. It likely came from some
launchpad.net address.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Changing email preference away from 'Each member individually'

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

[resending to jlarouche using alternate email address]

On 12/17/19 6:54 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> It's very annoying to get messages from Launchpad users sent to the
> individual members of ~ubuntugis.
> 
> The email preference cannot currently be changed to
> ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org because that's associated with the defunct
> ~ubuntu-lists users.
> 
> I tried to claim that team, but there was no message sent to this list.
> So I filed an issue instead:
> 
>  https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/687212
> 
> Hopefully we can fix the email preference with the help of LP admins.

We finally got feedback:

"
 OK, I've just talked to a colleague about how to arrange this, because
 it's a bit weird.  What we'll need to do is as follows:

 * You should follow "Is this a team you run?" on
   https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-lists, and then use the token emailed
   to ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org to convert it into a team.  (If it's a
   moderated mailing list that you moderate, feel free to fish the token
   out of the moderation interface rather than letting it reach the
   mailing list archives.)
 * Once it's been converted to a team, let us know and we can merge it
   into ~ubuntugis.
"

The token is likely stuck in the moderation queue.

@jlarouche, can you get it out?

Does anyone else have the password for the list administration?

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Changing email preference away from 'Each member individually'

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 12/17/19 6:54 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> It's very annoying to get messages from Launchpad users sent to the
> individual members of ~ubuntugis.
> 
> The email preference cannot currently be changed to
> ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org because that's associated with the defunct
> ~ubuntu-lists users.
> 
> I tried to claim that team, but there was no message sent to this list.
> So I filed an issue instead:
> 
>  https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/687212
> 
> Hopefully we can fix the email preference with the help of LP admins.

We finally got feedback:

"
 OK, I've just talked to a colleague about how to arrange this, because
 it's a bit weird.  What we'll need to do is as follows:

 * You should follow "Is this a team you run?" on
   https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-lists, and then use the token emailed
   to ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org to convert it into a team.  (If it's a
   moderated mailing list that you moderate, feel free to fish the token
   out of the moderation interface rather than letting it reach the
   mailing list archives.)
 * Once it's been converted to a team, let us know and we can merge it
   into ~ubuntugis.
"

The token is likely stuck in the moderation queue.

@jlarouche, can you get it out?

Does anyone else have the password for the list administration?

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

[Ubuntu] Changing email preference away from 'Each member individually'

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

It's very annoying to get messages from Launchpad users sent to the
individual members of ~ubuntugis.

The email preference cannot currently be changed to
ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org because that's associated with the defunct
~ubuntu-lists users.

I tried to claim that team, but there was no message sent to this list.
So I filed an issue instead:

 https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/687212

Hopefully we can fix the email preference with the help of LP admins.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] QGIS: unsupported SAGA version after last update -- ubuntugis-unstable channel

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 7/23/19 8:27 PM, Domenico Mozzanica wrote:
> Please, could you check this problem?

No. Such is the fate of processing plugins.

SAGA 2.3.x was hopelessly outdated, and freezing that branch and dub it
LTS didn't really work out. It didn't break qgis often, but it also
didn't backport fixes to keep up with changes in the system. See how
much grief it caused in Fedora for example.

If projects when their processing plugin to not break when their project
is upgraded, they need to provide a stable API that QGIS can use. If
your project cannot do that, it shouldn't be a QGIS plugin.

The SAGA update is required to unblock to transition to PROJ 6, which is
much more important than keeping the QGIS plugin working. It sucks for
QGIS users of the SAGA plugin, you should voice your complaints to SAGA
upstream.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Moving Xenial packages to Stable ppa

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 5/15/19 6:26 PM, Alex M wrote:
> I recommend we keep 2.x stable for Xenial for a few more months.

I don't think it's a good idea to keep EOL packages around in the PPA,
users that need QGIS 2.x should get it elsewhere.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Moving Xenial packages to Stable ppa

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 5/15/19 6:09 PM, Alex M wrote:
> On 5/15/19 02:02, Bas Couwenberg wrote:
>> On 2019-05-15 10:53, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
>>> Wondering if we should keep QGIS 2.x in the stable ppa or move to 3.x
>>
>> QGIS 2.x is EOL, so 3.x is preferred.
> 
> As long as there is still a repo that has 2.x for Xenial, does QGIS.org
> still have this? There are still workflows that break under 3.x, getting
> fewer every day but I know my lab is still in transition between due to
> missing features and regressions in 3.

These exist, but unsure for how long:

 https://qgis.org/ubuntu-ltr-2.18/
 https://qgis.org/ubuntugis-ltr-2.18/

> Seems 3.x LTS in Unstable, latest release from QGIS.org, and 2.x in
> Stable would keep all options open.

As long as those stable users understand that they are on their own in
case of issues, they cannot rely on us or upstream for fixes.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Pristine-tar couldn't checkout "qgis_3.4.6+dfsg.orig.tar.bz2"

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 3/23/19 12:27 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> I was building qgis 3.4.5 package yesterday on the same pc without any 
> problem.

Then something broke.

You can get the orig tarball here while it lasts:

 https://linuxminded.nl/tmp/qgis_3.4.6+dfsg.orig.tar.bz2

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Pristine-tar couldn't checkout "qgis_3.4.6+dfsg.orig.tar.bz2"

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 3/23/19 9:46 AM, Martin Landa wrote:
> pristine-tar: Failed to reproduce original tarball. Please file a bug report.
> pristine-tar: failed to generate tarball

Try pristine-tar 1.38 (on Debian stretch).

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Bionic updates

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 3/1/19 7:47 PM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
> QGIS 3.x is still in experimental in Debian

And it's there because of the freeze in preparation of the buster stable
release.

I'd like to get it into buster, but that requires consent from the
release team who have not responded yet. [0]

For users who rely on features that are only fully functional in QGIS
2.x it might be better to stay at 2.18.28 even though it's EOL. But
getting rid of Qt4 & Python 2 is very desirable too.

[0] https://bugs.debian.org/923184

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Bionic updates

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 12/5/18 10:15 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 12/5/18 10:12 PM, Even Rouault wrote:
>> On mercredi 5 décembre 2018 22:07:55 CET Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>>> On 12/5/18 9:59 PM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
>>>> I hope we get some space soon :)
>>>
>>> Or remove the trusty packages, it goes EOL in April.
>>
>> I'd prefer the space increase solution.
>>
>> Trusty packages are needed by all projects using Travis-CI (GDAL in 
>> particular), since Travis-CI is lagging with offering Trusty only for now...
> 
> Travis really needs to get its act together and start supporting xenial
> and bionic.

According to their docs, they already support xenial:

 https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/reference/overview/#linux

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Bionic updates

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 12/5/18 10:12 PM, Even Rouault wrote:
> On mercredi 5 décembre 2018 22:07:55 CET Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> On 12/5/18 9:59 PM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
>>> I hope we get some space soon :)
>>
>> Or remove the trusty packages, it goes EOL in April.
> 
> I'd prefer the space increase solution.
> 
> Trusty packages are needed by all projects using Travis-CI (GDAL in 
> particular), since Travis-CI is lagging with offering Trusty only for now...

Travis really needs to get its act together and start supporting xenial
and bionic.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Bionic updates

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 12/5/18 9:59 PM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
> I hope we get some space soon :)

Or remove the trusty packages, it goes EOL in April.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] QGis 3 on UbuntuGIS PPA

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/30/18 6:51 PM, Alex M wrote:
> Ubuntugis has 2 major repos:
> Stable - generally older versions of everything in case you need them,
> want LTR super long or need support for aging releases of Ubuntu.
> Unstable - mostly the latest version possible, except QGIS which is
> usually an LTR release (I forget why this happened). Also has support
> for older distros.

UbuntuGIS has the QGIS LTR version because it uses the packaging
maintained by the Debian GIS team, which only packages the LTR.

> Note: OSGeoLive packaging, and Debian packaging both feed into Ubuntugis
> directly helping to keep all the packages up to date.

UbuntuGIS is not up to date. UbuntuGIS gets updated packages when they
get copied from the OSGeoLive PPA. When OSGeoLive has not updated the
packages in their PPA like for the current release (the first based on
bionic), there are no updates for the UbuntuGIS PPA either.

In the past there were more contributors actively backporting packages
from Debian GIS to the UbuntuGIS PPA and when Debian GIS stalled
actively updated packages in the UbuntuGIS PPA, but those days are long
gone.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] MapServer Python MapScript and Wheels/Ubuntu Packages

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 9/22/18 12:29 AM, Seth G wrote:
> Thanks again for the reply. I guess the Python GDAL bindings are the closest 
> to MapServer, the package at 
> https://launchpad.net/~ubuntugis/+archive/ubuntu/ppa includes 
> "usr\lib\python3\dist-packages\osgeo\_gdal.cpython-35m-x86_64-linux-gnu.so", 
> so I guess is for Python 3.5 only? Is it possible to just support Python 3.6 
> (for example), and ignore other versions?

The GDAL Python bindings are built for all supported Python versions in
Debian using `pyversions -v -r` & `py3versions -v -r`. The output of
those two commands determine with which Python versions the build is
run. There should only a be a single supported Python 3 version in the
distribution, unless there is a migration to a new Python 3.x which you
shouldn't see in Ubuntu LTS.

The packages encode which version of Python they require in the file
path if they are not pure Python which support all versions. So yes, if
you see usr/lib/python3.5 or .cpython-35 in a path that means that
Python 3.5 is required for that file.

> Shapely also has a couple of binaries e.g.  
> _speedups.cpython-36m-x86_64-linux-gnu.so (plus the GOES library it wraps 
> around) but I think shapely is designed so these can be ignored if the 
> binaries don't match the Python version. 

The Python packaging policy recommends building the package for all
supported Python versions, as this eases transitions. At least the
default Python version will be used for the build when not supporting
more than one version, so you should never have the situation where a
Python module package does support the Python interpreter version in the
distribution.

This all goes out the window when you get binaries from PyPI instead of
relying on the distribution packages.

> I'll be concentrating in the next few months on cleaning up Mapscript 
> examples, getting test suites running on Python3 etc. so may repost here once 
> this work is complete, and there may be more of a demand for a 
> python3-mapscript. 

I will not be patching the mapserver package to include those changes,
so you should encourage your peers in the MapServer project to release
7.2.1 or 7.4 soon to make your changes more widely available.

> Ideally the aim would be to get a Python3 mapscript installation on OSGeoLive 
> along with a Jupyter notebook of examples, so any suggestions on how best to 
> achieve this are welcome (even if it is to continue with Python 2.7). 

Is there sufficient space on the OSGeoLive images to have both
python-mapscript & python3-mapscript along with their dependencies
installed?

Do all reverse dependencies of python-mapscript also support Python 3 so
the Python 2 package could be dropped?

There are issue you need to think about in the context of OSGeoLive,
which differs from an installed system with the UbuntuGIS repositories.

Kind Regards,

Bas
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] MapServer Python MapScript and Wheels/Ubuntu Packages

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 9/21/18 9:22 AM, Seth G wrote:
> By "use of wheels" I meant is it possible they can be used as the source of 
> all files required for the installation e.g. the binaries would go to /lib 
> and the examples and tests to /share. 

The python-mapscript package is built from the mapserver source package,
not from the source dist on PyPI. Using the latter would make it much
easier to build mapscript packages for all supported Python version in
Debian. But then we risk that MapServer is updated before the Python
bindings are, causing the Python binding to lag behind the other binding
that are built from the mapserver source package.

> I can see how builds for every version of Python3 would be a pain. 
> Looking at the shapely package at 
> https://packages.ubuntu.com/en/bionic/python3-shapely - it contains binaries 
> for just Python 3.6. Would limiting the Python version be possible on a 
> repository such as ubuntugis-unstable? 

Shapely is not a good example. It's just a Python module, not a SWIG
generated binding part of a larger project like MapServer.

> Apologies if the questions are fairly basic, but Linux distributions are new 
> to me. Would https://wiki.debian.org/Python/LibraryStyleGuide be the best 
> place to start reading? I'll also give manylinux another try. 

The Python packages on wiki.d.o are mostly applicable to pure Python
modules, not so much to SWIG generated bindings for C libraries.

If there is sufficient demand for a python3-mapscript package I willing
to look at updating the mapserver source package to also build that. But
as I'm not a fan of having to rebuild mapserver for multiple language
versions, I'm not going to do that without sufficient user demand.

Kind Regards,

Bas
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] MapServer Python MapScript and Wheels/Ubuntu Packages

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 9/20/18 11:35 PM, Seth G wrote:
> I see there is already a 7.2 python-mapscript package available at 
> https://packages.ubuntu.com/en/cosmic/python-mapscript
> Can Python packages released on Ubuntu make use of wheels to create the 
> package?

No, the product of a Debian source package build process are binary
packages.

> Would a python3-mapscript package also be possible to create?

Not easily. The upstream build process only supports building with a
single Python version. We'll need to rebuild mapserver with every
supported Python version in Debian like we do for Ruby to add support
for Python 3, and I'm not very fond of that.

Kind Regards,

Bas
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] [gdal-dev] Issue #2068 on Mint 19

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 9/15/18 2:28 PM, Micha Silver wrote:
> AFAIK, you don't necessarily need the ubuntugis repo in bionic distros.
> The regular ubuntu repos have pretty recent versions. On my Mint systems
> I get GRASS 7.4.0, and gdal 2.2.3.  But every invocation of gdal
> commands begins with:
> micha@TP480:~$ gdalinfo --version
> ERROR 1: libgrass_dgl.7.4.0.so: cannot open shared object file: No such
> file or directory
> ERROR 1: libgrass_dgl.7.4.0.so: cannot open shared object file: No such
> file or directory
> ERROR 1: libgrass_vector.7.4.0.so: cannot open shared object file: No
> such file or directory
> ERROR 1: libgrass_vector.7.4.0.so: cannot open shared object file: No
> such file or directory
> GDAL 2.2.3, released 2017/11/20

That's a known issue on Ubuntu based systems which build with
--as-needed by default. A fix was added in libgdal-grass (2.3.0-2)
triggered by https://trac.osgeo.org/osgeolive/ticket/2068.

This fix is also available in libgdal-grass (2.2.3-3~bionic0) in the
OSGeoLive PPA, but not in the ubuntugis-unstable PPA (any more). It's
possible that a later rebuild of the libgdal-grass package reverted the fix.

> And these errors are appearing also in R with the MODIS package.
> 
> What are the implications of adding the ubuntugis-unstable repo to solve
> this?

The libgdal-grass package in the UbuntuGIS PPA needs to be fixed. The
older package from bionic most likely also doesn't have this fix.

Kind Regards,

Bas
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Packages for Precise disappeared ?

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 06/17/2018 07:58 PM, Even Rouault wrote:
> Looking at https://launchpad.net/~ubuntugis/+archive/ubuntu/ppa/+packages , I 
> can't indeed see any Precise related packages. Have they gone on purpose ?

Yes, precise is EOL since April 2017, and the ubuntugis-unstable PPA was
using more than the 8 GB available for the repository.

All precise packages, and all superseded packages for the other
distributions have been removed to free up space.

Environments still using EOL releases need to upgrade to a still
supported release.

Kind Regards,

Bas
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Mismatch in binaryfulness. (arch) False != (files) True

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 06/15/2018 04:21 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> thanks for clarification. Is it possible to disable buildinfo? I need
> to remove buildinfo files manually from source.changes file otherwise
> it's refused by Launchpad. Martin

Launchpad should support buildinfo files:

 https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/1657704

See also:

 https://bugs.debian.org/853795
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Mismatch in binaryfulness. (arch) False != (files) True

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 06/13/2018 11:59 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> I just wonder why _amd64.buildinfo file is created just in
> ubuntugis/bionic branch and not in ubuntugis/xenial branch. Bearing in
> mind that I used exactly the same commands to produce source packages
> for upload in the both branches.

Because bionic includes newer versions of the packaging toolchain.
buildinfo suppport was added to dpkg (1.18.11) which was released after
xenial.
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Mismatch in binaryfulness. (arch) False != (files) True

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 06/07/2018 05:55 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> 2018-06-07 17:52 GMT+02:00 Sebastiaan Couwenberg :
>> That mentions both -S and --git-pbuilder-options=--source-only-changes,
> 
> I am using --git-pbuilder-options=--source-only-changes
> 
>> document the --source-only-changes flag? If not, just use -S.
> 
> Yes, I am running Debing testing. Martin

Have you tried using both? --s-o-c is a pbuilder option whereas -S is a
dpkg-buildpackage option.
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Mismatch in binaryfulness. (arch) False != (files) True

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 06/07/2018 05:47 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> 2018-06-07 17:37 GMT+02:00 Sebastiaan Couwenberg :
>> Make sure your building with the -S dpkg-buildpackage flag for older
>> Ubuntu releases, for newer you need --source-only-changes.
> 
> yes, I am sure. I running the commands from my cookbook [1]. No
> difference in procedure. Same git, same pc. Martin
> 
> [1] https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/DebianUbuntuPackaging#Buildnewpackage

That mentions both -S and --git-pbuilder-options=--source-only-changes,
for the latter you need a reasonably recent pbuilder. Does pbuilder(8)
document the --source-only-changes flag? If not, just use -S.

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Mismatch in binaryfulness. (arch) False != (files) True

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 06/07/2018 01:17 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> Mismatch in binaryfulness. (arch) False != (files) True

Make sure your building with the -S dpkg-buildpackage flag for older
Ubuntu releases, for newer you need --source-only-changes.
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Supported Distributions?

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 03/17/2018 03:21 PM, Nathan Adams wrote:
> Where can I find an updated list of supported distributions?

Only the LTS releases are supported, once Ubuntu stops supporting them
(e.g. precise going end-of-life) so does the PPA.

You can see the series for which packages are available via:

 https://launchpad.net/~ubuntugis/+archive/ubuntu/ubuntugis-unstable/+packages

Kind Regards,

Bas


___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Mismatch in binaryfulness. (arch) False != (files) True

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 03/03/2018 07:00 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> 2018-03-03 18:51 GMT+01:00 Sebastiaan Couwenberg <sebas...@xs4all.nl>:
>> How do you build and upload (exact commandlines)?
> 
> I am using exactly the same commands as for ubuntugis packages [1].
> 
>> If you're only doing a source-only build (-S), do a binary one and have
>> lintian do a full report.
> 
> Here is my command.
> 
> $ gbp buildpackage --git-pbuilder-options=--source-only-changes -sa
> --git-pbuilder --git-ignore-new --git-dist=${DIST}

Don't use --git-ignore-new, fix your working directory instead.

My source-only build for artful and upload to Launchpad works as expected.

Must be something in your environment.

Kind Regards,

Bas
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Mismatch in binaryfulness. (arch) False != (files) True

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 03/03/2018 06:42 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> But unfortunately I am still getting rejection from
> Launchpad (Mismatch in binaryfulness. (arch) False != (files) True).
> There must be something I am overlooking :-(

How do you build and upload (exact commandlines)?

If you're only doing a source-only build (-S), do a binary one and have
lintian do a full report.

Kind Regards,

Bas
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Mismatch in binaryfulness. (arch) False != (files) True

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 03/03/2018 04:18 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> [1] https://github.com/landam/grass-stable-ppa/tree/ubuntugis/artful

There is a stray control.in template which is no longer used since
7.2.2-2/7.4.0~rc1-1~exp1, see:

 
https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/grass.git/commit/?id=e6d0e56f15798c390e63546e8eadc18bdd008745

There is also an issue in the changelog file with non-sequential versions:

 grass (7.4.0-1~artful2) artful; urgency=medium
 grass (7.4.0-1~artful1) artful; urgency=medium
 grass (7.4.0-1~xenial1) xenial; urgency=medium
 grass (7.4.0-1) unstable; urgency=medium

7.4.0~xenial1 is a higher version that 7.4.0-1~artful1:

 $ dpkg --compare-versions 7.4.0-1~xenial1 gt 7.4.0-1~artful1 ; echo $?
 0

The ~xenial1 changelog entry should be removed.

Kind Regards,

Bas
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Mismatch in binaryfulness. (arch) False != (files) True

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 03/03/2018 03:30 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> Do you have any idea what is wrong?

Not without the source package.
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] upgrade to qgis2.18

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 02/27/2018 08:16 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> recently QGIS 3.0 has been published. So QGIS 2.18 became current LTR.
> It's time to upgrade QGIS 2.14 to 2.18 ASAIU. Today I uploaded new
> package (2.18.17) to ubuntugis experimental for xenial. If no
> objection I will copy new packages to UbuntuGIS Unstable in the next
> days.

The branch still needed to be updated in the Vcs-Git URL. Fixed in git.

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] unable to build gdal-grass package for trusty

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 01/28/2018 08:24 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> 2018-01-28 20:17 GMT+01:00 Sebastiaan Couwenberg <sebas...@xs4all.nl>:
>> There is not enough information, like which PPA your using and which
>> versions of the gdal & grass packages are being used.
> 
> UbuntuGIS Expr, 2.2.2, see [1]

There is no spatialite in ubuntugis-experimental that has been built
with the newer geos there.

Add the ubuntugis-unstable PPA as an additional dependency in your
ubuntugis-unstable chroot. The PPA is configured with a dependency on
ubuntugis-unstable for Launchpad builds to pull other dependencies from
that PPA instead of from the Ubuntu repos, but this does not translate
to the apt repository it provides, you need to configure separate
sources on clients that use the experimental PPA.

Kind Regards,

Bas
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] unable to build gdal-grass package for trusty

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 01/28/2018 07:59 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> I am currently unable to build gdal-grass package for trusty. The gbp
> buildpackage command fails with:
> 
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
>  libgeos-c1v5 : Breaks: libgeos-c1 (< 3.4.2-8~) but 3.4.2-4ubuntu1 is
> to be installed.
> Unable to resolve dependencies!  Giving up...
> 
> Any idea why dependecies are broken? Thanks! Ma

There is not enough information, like which PPA your using and which
versions of the gdal & grass packages are being used.

Something is pulling in the old geos from Ubuntu instead of the newer
package in the PPA.

Since the dependency chain of libgdal-grass is quite limited, it's most
likely either gdal or grass.

Inspect the dependencies of the gdal & grass packages that libgdal-grass
requires to build to see if they all use the new geos. If they do, it
may be spatialite (one of libgdal dependencies) that pulls in the old geos.

Kind Regards,

Bas
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] build qgis for ubuntu-experimental

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 01/28/2018 03:14 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> 2018-01-28 14:54 GMT+01:00 Sebastiaan Couwenberg <sebas...@xs4all.nl>:
>> The package was not updated for GRASS 7.4, compare the changes in the
>> ubuntu/xenial branch to those in master.
> 
> ops, overlooked [1], something else? Ma
> 
> [1] 
> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/qgis.git/commit/?id=8b2ba5deb169428afc2ede7f8c253000a5dcb0f7

The library path needs to be updated too:

 
https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/qgis.git/commit/?id=0a6d591bced43ef028c5676681c55a2a2ef1ae09

That was already merged into the experimental branch, for the final
release only the version in dependencies was updated.

Kind Regards,

Bas
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] build qgis for ubuntu-experimental

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 01/28/2018 02:40 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> 2018-01-27 18:53 GMT+01:00 Sebastiaan Couwenberg <sebas...@xs4all.nl>:
>> Ensure that the pkg-kde-tools package is installed outside the chroot
>> too, that's where the clean target is run before the build is started in
>> the chroot.
> 
> thanks, it helped. The original message remains:

You need to have grass installed outside the chroot too for it to be
found in the clean target that is executed outside of the chroot.

> but the package built and uploaded. Ma

The package was not updated for GRASS 7.4, compare the changes in the
ubuntu/xenial branch to those in master.

Kind Regards,

Bas
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] build qgis for ubuntu-experimental

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 01/27/2018 06:35 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> dh: unable to load addon pkgkde_symbolshelper: Can't locate

The dh squence is provided by pkg-kde-tools which is part of the qgis
build dependencies. You can use apt-file to find which packages provides
missing files:

 $ apt-file search pkgkde_symbolshelper
 pkg-kde-tools:
/usr/share/perl5/Debian/Debhelper/Sequence/pkgkde_symbolshelper.pm

Ensure that the pkg-kde-tools package is installed outside the chroot
too, that's where the clean target is run before the build is started in
the chroot.

Kind Regards,

Bas
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] build qgis for ubuntu-experimental

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 01/12/2018 05:58 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> 2018-01-12 17:57 GMT+01:00 Martin Landa <landa.mar...@gmail.com>:
>> 2018-01-12 17:39 GMT+01:00 Sebastiaan Couwenberg <sebas...@xs4all.nl>:
>>> Does the /var/cache/pbuilder/base-xenial-ubuntugis-experimental.cow
>>> chroot use the ubuntugis-experimental PPA in its apt sources?
>>
>> I will check, I except that it should be fine. I was able to build
>> gdal-grass package in the same environment. Ma
> 
> root@debian:/# grep ubuntugis /etc/apt/sources.list
> deb http://ppa.launchpad.net/ubuntugis/ubuntugis-experimental/ubuntu xenial 
> main

Is the key for the repo installed successfully, does the log for the
cowbuilder --update command so any warnings or errors for the repo?

The full build log should provide more insight.

Kind Regards,

Bas

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] [Qgis-user] GRASS support lost (again) on Ubuntu/Mint

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 09/28/2017 07:09 PM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
> I think we have to make the publishing process more strict in the
> future, that is no one publishes directly on Unstable, no mater how nice
> the new version of a package is, until a full transition and testing is
> done.

That's too strict for grass updates in my opinion, I don't do a official
transition for grass in Debian either. I just rebuild the reverse
dependencies after moving a new upstream release of grass to unstable.
The process for UbuntuGIS is pretty much the same.

The QtWebKit issues in qgis were problematic because the people updating
qgis in UbuntuGIS were not involved with QtWebKit deprecation in Debian
and the changes made to the qgis package for that. It also didn't help
that the previous updates that also ran into this issue didn't use a
branch in the git repository to have to changes preserved in the
subsequent updates.

These kind of issues are to be expected for users of PPAs, especially
those that use more than one PPA (e.g. ubuntugis-unstable + qgis.org).
Lack of integration or delays between them are inherent to separate
repositories managed by different people. The qgis.org packages now tend
to be rebuild when dependencies in ubuntugis require it, this was much
more problematic in the past.

Most importantly the ubuntugis contributors need to gain more experience
with the packages and what more needs to be done in certain cases other
than the plain rebuilds that are sufficient most of the time.

Things that can help improve the situation is doing binary builds before
a source-only upload to Launchpad. Those binary packages can then be
tested with piuparts and autopkgtest to verify that they install and
upgrade correctly for example. This is done automatically by the QA
infrastructure in Debian, but lacks for Launchpad builds.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] [Qgis-user] GRASS support lost (again) on Ubuntu/Mint

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 09/27/2017 09:20 PM, Micha Silver wrote:
>>> The place to report issues is the ubuntugis mailing list
>>> ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org  onhttps://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
>
> Andre has already entered a ticket in trac.

That would be: https://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/ticket/81

Please note that Trac notification don't reach the team, so visibility
of those is low to non-existent. Hence the recommendation to send issues
to the mailinglist which most team members are subscribed to.

The changes for QtWebKit in the Ubuntu package were not made completely,
the conflicting files are no longer included in the package but the
control file still includes the Breaks/Replaces.

Martin who updated the GRASS package and its reverse dependencies was
not aware of these packaging issues.

I've pushed a fix for the issue, someone actually using UbuntuGIS should
build and test the package.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] [Qgis-user] GRASS support lost (again) on Ubuntu/Mint

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 09/27/2017 08:15 PM, Alex M wrote:
> On 09/27/2017 10:53 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> On 09/27/2017 07:21 PM, Alex M wrote:
>>> Ah that makes sense, if qgis.org builds against ubuntugis, then GRASS
>>> updates will always cause this, since a rebuild of qgis.org is not
>>> triggered.
>>>
>>> Seems like some logistics could be worked out.
>>
>> The qgis packages needs to depend on the virtual ABI package again so
>> that the dependency will be unsatisfied when grass is updated and qgis
>> hasn't been rebuilt yet.
>>
>> I've pushed a change for the package in Debian for the above. The QGIS
>> developers will need to do the same for their packaging.
> 
> Forwarding to the QGIS team in case they have questions. Do you have a
> changeset that shows what you did?

https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/qgis.git/commit/?id=e2ef4e54949e6f61e82f027ad264c578e04a7193

But qgis should determine the ABI package name like libgdal-grass:

 https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/gdal-grass.git/tree/debian/rules#n17

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] [Qgis-user] GRASS support lost (again) on Ubuntu/Mint

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 09/27/2017 07:21 PM, Alex M wrote:
> Ah that makes sense, if qgis.org builds against ubuntugis, then GRASS
> updates will always cause this, since a rebuild of qgis.org is not
> triggered.
> 
> Seems like some logistics could be worked out.

The qgis packages needs to depend on the virtual ABI package again so
that the dependency will be unsatisfied when grass is updated and qgis
hasn't been rebuilt yet.

I've pushed a change for the package in Debian for the above. The QGIS
developers will need to do the same for their packaging.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] [gdal-dev] Binary of the latest released GDAL for travis?

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 09/20/2017 10:56 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
> Angelos, Bas, do you have a list of gdal dependencies and the order in
> which they need to be built? I'm thinking about uploading my packages
> to ubuntugis/unstable.
The the transition tracker:

 http://linuxminded.nl/tmp/pkg-grass-transitions/html/gdal.html

The UbuntuGIS specific transition trackers are broken due to some issue
in ben that was introduced in the stretch version. It always uses the
data for Debian unstable instead of those configured in the config file.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] gdal-grass package for trusty

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 09/19/2017 10:55 AM, Martin Landa wrote:
> I have problem with building gdal-grass package for trusty. It is failing on
> 
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
>  libgeos-c1v5 : Breaks: libgeos-c1 (< 3.4.2-8~) but 3.4.2-4ubuntu1 is
> to be installed.
> Unable to resolve dependencies!  Giving up...
> 
> I checked debian files but without success. Any idea? Thanks, Ma

The dependency chain is pulling in the geos packages from trusty instead
of the PPA. Ensure the build environment is clean and has the PPA
packages available.

The buildlog show which package versions are installed, check which of
those depends on the old geos packages (apt-cache show  | grep Depends)

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] QGIS 2.18 LTR in UbuntuGIS

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 09/06/2017 11:40 AM, Martin Landa wrote:
> are there any plans to include new QGIS LTR (2.18) in UbuntuGIS. Both
> Expr [1] and Unstable [2] show QGIS 2.14.

Probably not, especially not in the short term.

The package in Debian will remain on 2.14 as long as possible. In
December 2.18.15 will replace 2.14.20 in the qgis.org long-term repo
[0], and the package in Debian will switch to 2.18 too.

This all assumes that Qt4 is not removed from Debian in the mean time.
The Qt4 removal may force the inclusion of QGIS 3.x in Debian for its
Qt5 support before 3.4.4 replaces 2.18.27 as the LTR in the long-term repo.

As long as the Debian source package is used for OSGeo-Live & UbuntuGIS
the versions included there will follow the qgis.org LTR repo.

[0]
http://qgis.org/en/site/getinvolved/development/roadmap.html#release-schedule

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] ​Alioth.debian.org and gdal-grass package

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 09/01/2017 05:46 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> 2017-08-16 18:31 GMT+02:00 Sebastiaan Couwenberg <sebas...@xs4all.nl>:
>> There should a branch for each distribution (trusty, xenial, etc), these
>> packages should be uploaded to the unstable or experimental PPA, and
>> copied from there to the other PPAs once its ready.
> 
> I can take care also about gdal-grass ubuntu branches, but it seems
> that I do not have push privileges
> 
> fatal: unable to access
> 'https://anonscm.debian.org/git/pkg-grass/gdal-grass.git/': The
> requested URL returned error: 403
> 
> Am I right? Thanks, Ma

You need to use SSH to git.d.o for pushes, anonscm.d.o is a read-only
host. See:

 https://pkg-grass.alioth.debian.org/policy/packaging.html#git-push-backport

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] ​Alioth.debian.org and gdal-grass package

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 08/17/2017 12:53 AM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
> Hi Bas, this would probably require I get commit access to many of the
> Alioth git repositories. Is that a problem?

Of course not. You've been a member of the pkg-grass team on Alioth for
quite a while [0], and so have had commit access to its VCS repositories
for that time already.

Kind Regards,

Bas

[0] https://alioth.debian.org/users/kalxas-guest/

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] ​Alioth.debian.org and gdal-grass package

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 08/16/2017 06:21 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> I wonder whether gdal-grass git repo [1] is currently used for
> managing UbuntuGIS packages. Eg. ubuntu/xenial branch contains GDAL
> driver version 2.1.0, while Unstable PPA offers 2.2.1 (Stable 2.1.3) The 
> builds I did for UbuntuGIS use the git repository, those provided
by Angelos don't.

He really needs to start maintaining the packaging for OSGeo-Live and
UbuntuGIS in the pkg-grass git repo as well, but changing ones way of
working is a slow process.

By not using the git repositories there is no peer-review of the
packaging and issues like the recent qgis issue happen and are not
caught sooner. Nor are the tools able to easy the backporting work by
keep track of changes for backports.

> I also wonder how to manage more PPAs (UbuntuGIS stable and unstable)
> in one git branch. For example currently gdal-grass package in Stable
> is 2.1.3 while in Unstable 2.2.1. Is there any policy for that? BTW,
> currently I am using grass git repo [2] for managing Unstable PPA.
> Should I use similar approach for gdal-grass repo?

There should a branch for each distribution (trusty, xenial, etc), these
packages should be uploaded to the unstable or experimental PPA, and
copied from there to the other PPAs once its ready.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] non-LTS packages

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 05/04/2017 08:29 AM, Martin Landa wrote:
> 2017-04-23 19:34 GMT+02:00 Martin Landa :
>>> If you want to maintain grass packages for other Ubuntu releases, that
>>> should be done in the GRASS PPA. Which comes with the downside of users
>>> likely having to deal with incompatible packages between PPAs when
>>> they're using more than one.
>>
>> OK, I will use GRASS PPA for non-LTS packages. Thanks for feedback, Ma
> 
> just to be sure, is it feasible to maintain such packages in git [1]?

Yes, but you should use a different branch and tag prefix to
differentiate it from the packaging maintained for the UbuntuGIS PPAs.

For the packaging intended for the GRASS PPA the 'grass/' prefix is
appropriate.

See also:

 https://pkg-grass.alioth.debian.org/policy/repositories.html#other-git-branches

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Fixing CVE-2016-9839 & CVE-2017-5522 for mapserver

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

The mapserver packages in the UbuntuGIS PPAs have been updated to fix
the recent security issues.

The fixed packages should be available shortly:

 * mapserver (7.0.4-1~xenial1)
 * mapserver (7.0.4-1~trusty1)
 * mapserver (6.4.2-1~precise3)

I've also prepared updates for the packages in Ubuntu, see:

 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mapserver/+bug/1648998/comments/2

Unfortunately I cannot send Canonical a bill for my time, because they
don't maintain most the packages they take from Debian :-(

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] GDAL, GEOS transitions for Xenial

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 12/25/2016 11:56 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 12/25/2016 10:21 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> On 12/25/2016 09:48 PM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
>>> Regarding otb package, I rebuilt it in my staging ppa, it seems to be
>>> missing monteverdi which was merged into otb 5.8.
>>
>> Yes, it is now a module:
>>
>> "
>>  Monteverdi sources have been moved inside OTB repository and
>>  Monteverdi is now included as an OTB module.
>> "
>>
>> https://www.orfeo-toolbox.org/orfeo-toolbox-5-8-is-released/
>>
>> But it's not built as can be seen in the build log:
>>
>>  -- Disabled OTBMonteverdiGUI because OTB_USE_QWT is OFF
> 
> Enabling the OTB_USE_QWT option after adding libqwt-dev to the build
> dependencies and dependencies of libotb-dev, the build fails in Debian
> unstable because the Qwt version is not supported:
> 
> -- Found Qwt: /usr/lib/libqwt.so (found version "6.1.2")
> CMake Error at Modules/ThirdParty/Qwt/otb-module-init.cmake:4 (message):
>   Only Qwt 5 is supported.  Found version 6.1.2
> 
> Changing the dependency to libqwt5-qt4-dev resolves that, but won't be
> very future proof.
> 
> Qwt 5 is likely to be removed from Debian and Ubuntu in the future, it's
> maintainer doesn't have time for the Qwt packages any more, so the OTB
> team should really start supporting Qwt 6 which QGIS uses too so only a
> single version needs to be adopted by others in Debian. I talked about
> this with the Qt/KDE maintainers before, and we'll likely move the Qwt 6
> package to that team after the stretch release when the next release
> critical bug affects the qwt package.
> 
> In the mean time I'm updating the otb package to also build the
> monteverdi binary package, but it's going to need some work to get in shape.

Try this: https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/otb.git

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] GDAL, GEOS transitions for Xenial

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 12/25/2016 10:21 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 12/25/2016 09:48 PM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
>> Regarding otb package, I rebuilt it in my staging ppa, it seems to be
>> missing monteverdi which was merged into otb 5.8.
> 
> Yes, it is now a module:
> 
> "
>  Monteverdi sources have been moved inside OTB repository and
>  Monteverdi is now included as an OTB module.
> "
> 
> https://www.orfeo-toolbox.org/orfeo-toolbox-5-8-is-released/
> 
> But it's not built as can be seen in the build log:
> 
>  -- Disabled OTBMonteverdiGUI because OTB_USE_QWT is OFF

Enabling the OTB_USE_QWT option after adding libqwt-dev to the build
dependencies and dependencies of libotb-dev, the build fails in Debian
unstable because the Qwt version is not supported:

-- Found Qwt: /usr/lib/libqwt.so (found version "6.1.2")
CMake Error at Modules/ThirdParty/Qwt/otb-module-init.cmake:4 (message):
  Only Qwt 5 is supported.  Found version 6.1.2

Changing the dependency to libqwt5-qt4-dev resolves that, but won't be
very future proof.

Qwt 5 is likely to be removed from Debian and Ubuntu in the future, it's
maintainer doesn't have time for the Qwt packages any more, so the OTB
team should really start supporting Qwt 6 which QGIS uses too so only a
single version needs to be adopted by others in Debian. I talked about
this with the Qt/KDE maintainers before, and we'll likely move the Qwt 6
package to that team after the stretch release when the next release
critical bug affects the qwt package.

In the mean time I'm updating the otb package to also build the
monteverdi binary package, but it's going to need some work to get in shape.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] GDAL, GEOS transitions for Xenial

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 12/25/2016 10:21 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 12/25/2016 09:48 PM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
>> Regarding otb package, I rebuilt it in my staging ppa, it seems to be
>> missing monteverdi which was merged into otb 5.8.
> 
> Yes, it is now a module:
> 
> "
>  Monteverdi sources have been moved inside OTB repository and
>  Monteverdi is now included as an OTB module.
> "
> 
> https://www.orfeo-toolbox.org/orfeo-toolbox-5-8-is-released/
> 
> But it's not built as can be seen in the build log:
> 
>  -- Disabled OTBMonteverdiGUI because OTB_USE_QWT is OFF

Enabling the OTB_USE_QWT option after adding libqwt-dev to the build
dependencies and dependencies of libotb-dev, the build fails in Debian
unstable because the Qwt version is not supported:

-- Found Qwt: /usr/lib/libqwt.so (found version "6.1.2")
CMake Error at Modules/ThirdParty/Qwt/otb-module-init.cmake:4 (message):
  Only Qwt 5 is supported.  Found version 6.1.2

Changing the dependency to libqwt5-qt4-dev resolves that, but won't be
very future proof.

Qwt 5 is likely to be removed from Debian and Ubuntu in the future, it's
maintainer doesn't have time for the Qwt packages any more, so the OTB
team should really start supporting Qwt 6 which QGIS uses too so only a
single version needs to be adopted by others in Debian. I talked about
this with the Qt/KDE maintainers before, and we'll likely move the Qwt 6
package to that team after the stretch release when the next release
critical bug affects the qwt package.

In the mean time I'm updating the otb package to also build the
monteverdi binary package, but it's going to need some work to get in shape.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Fixing CVE-2016-9839 for mapserver

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 12/06/2016 12:31 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 12/06/2016 12:22 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> Today the MapServer team has released version 7.0.3 which fixes
>> CVE-2016-9839. To quote the release announcement [0]:
>>
>> "
>>  That issue involves OGR error messages being too verbose in some
>>  instances and potentially disclosing sensitive information if the
>>  underlying connection fails. In addition we have backported a somewhat
>>  similar fix to the 6.x series for PostGIS layers.
>> "
>>
>> I've already updated the package in unstable, and have cherry-picked the
>> commit fixing the issue for OGR & PostGIS layers for the package in
>> jessie (6.4.1-5+deb8u1) & wheezy (6.0.1-3.2+deb7u3). See the attached
>> debdiffs.
>>
>> The "sensitive information" are the credentials for the database
>> configured in the mapfile which are reported in the error message. If
>> the database is accessible over the network unauthorized users may gain
>> access using the credentials from the error message. An example is
>> provided in the the upstream issue [1] for the PostGIS layer, and
>> similarly affects the OGR layer [2][3].
>>
>> I don't think the issue is remotely exploitable, unless some way to
>> force the database connection failure to occur is found. As long as the
>> database is only accessible on the localhost, the impact is the issue is
>> limited.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> [0] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/mapserver-dev/2016-December/014979.html
>> [1] https://github.com/mapserver/mapserver/pull/4928
>> [2] https://github.com/mapserver/mapserver/pull/5356
>> [3] 
>> http://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/219426/mapserver-hide-ogr-exception
> 
> The above also affects the mapservers packages in the UbuntuGIS PPAs.
> 
> I've updated the mapserver package to 7.0.3 for xenial & trusty in
> ubuntugis-unstable already, these still need to be copied to -testing &
> -stable though.
> 
> The issue also affects the precise package, but I haven't updated that
> due to lacking a suitable chroot. Including the patch from the jessie
> package should be sufficient to fix the package for precise too:
> 
>  
> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/mapserver.git/commit/?h=jessie=574f906653bab70ee6403997175935e42f99c58f
> 
> Any volunteers to fix this issue in the precise package?

Nevermind, I've updated the package for precise too.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Moving packages from Unstable to Stable (Trusty)

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 11/05/2016 11:52 AM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
> Thank you for the rebuilds, I will copy the files to stable during the
> weekend.

I see that packages have been copied, but the transition trackers still
show many bad packages. I've deleted several old superseded packages
which clears up most of these, but still some bad packages remain:

 transition: geos

  osm2pgsql   (0.85.0-1~trusty1)
  cartopy (0.11.0-0~trusty1)

 
http://linuxminded.nl/tmp/pkg-grass-transitions/ubuntugis-stable/trusty/html/geos.html

 transition: gdal

  mapnik  (2.3.0+dev20140426.git.a4985b3-1~trusty1)
  gmt (5.1.2+dfsg1-1~exp8~trusty)
  otb-ice (0.3.0-2~trusty1)
  monteverdi2 (0.8.1-1~trusty1)

 
http://linuxminded.nl/tmp/pkg-grass-transitions/ubuntugis-stable/trusty/html/gdal.html

As these packages aren't in ubuntugis-unstable, perhaps they should be
removed instead of rebuilt for the respective transitions.

Better is probably to update those packages in ubuntugis-unstable and
copy them to ubuntugis-stable after a week or two without issues reported?

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Moving packages from Unstable to Stable (Trusty)

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/29/2016 12:10 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 10/28/2016 05:24 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> On 10/28/2016 04:18 PM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
>>> The Xenial unstable packages have been moved to stable. We can do
>>> rebuilds for Trusty if needed.
>>
>> Transition trackers are at:
>>
>>  http://linuxminded.nl/tmp/pkg-grass-transitions/ubuntugis-stable/trusty/
>>  http://linuxminded.nl/tmp/pkg-grass-transitions/ubuntugis-stable/xenial/
>>
>> The xenial ones are looking good so far, and trusty doesn't have those
>> packages yet.
> 
> I've copied to ubuntugis-unstable packages for trusty to
> ubuntugis-testing, and most of the python packages are failing to build
> due to test failures. It's not looking very good so far.

As expected, the packages should be copies in stages, because they are
affected by the geos & gdal transitions. spatialite built with the geos
from trusty instead of the one from the PPA for example. This is
illustrated by the transition trackers:

 http://linuxminded.nl/tmp/pkg-grass-transitions/ubuntugis-testing/trusty/

The packages affected by the geos transition need no-change rebuilds in
the order of the dependency levels to have them all use the geos from
the PPA. The same goes for the packages affected by the gdal transition.

The BuildOrder wiki [0] probably needs an update to include more
packages and dependency levels.

[0] https://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki/BuildOrder

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Moving packages from Unstable to Stable (Trusty)

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/28/2016 05:24 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 10/28/2016 04:18 PM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
>> The Xenial unstable packages have been moved to stable. We can do
>> rebuilds for Trusty if needed.
> 
> Transition trackers are at:
> 
>  http://linuxminded.nl/tmp/pkg-grass-transitions/ubuntugis-stable/trusty/
>  http://linuxminded.nl/tmp/pkg-grass-transitions/ubuntugis-stable/xenial/
> 
> The xenial ones are looking good so far, and trusty doesn't have those
> packages yet.

I've copied to ubuntugis-unstable packages for trusty to
ubuntugis-testing, and most of the python packages are failing to build
due to test failures. It's not looking very good so far.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

[Ubuntu] Enabling other architectures

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Currently the UbuntuGIS packages are only built for amd64 & i386, but
Launchpad can also build the packages for arm64, armel, armhf, powerpc,
ppc64el & s390x.

There have been questions about packages for armhf by Rasberry Pi users,
since the Pi 2 and later should support that instead of the ARMv6
architecture variant specific to rasbian.

I think we should consider at enabling the armhf architecture since
there's been explicit demand.

Based on the experiences in Debian I recommended again enabling armel,
which not all packages support. It's a bit of a problematic architecture
and likely to no longer be a release architecture in Debian after stretch.

There has been no explicit demand for arm64, powerpc, ppc64el & s390x
packages, so I think we can leave those until demand is voiced.

With the debug packages enabled storage usage of the PPA will increase,
as will enabling more architectures, so we may need to requests
additional storage if we choose to enable armhf.

Thoughts, concerns, etc?

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

[Ubuntu] Enabled debug packages

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

In the recent MapCache thread I wrote:

> It's a shame Launchpad doesn't build debug packages automatically,
> that should be helpful to troubleshoot this further.

It turns out that this can easily be enabled in the PPA details, which I
have subsequently done for ubuntugis-stable, -unstable & -experimental.
And will do so too for -testing after I've recreated it.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] GRASS and laz lidar files.

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/19/2016 08:31 PM, Randal Hale wrote:
> I tried to import a .laz file and through a series of learning
> experiences - I can't. I jumped over to OSGEO4W and I can import it. It
> seems that version (7.0.5) has been compiled with laz support.
> 
> Or I could be crazy.Is there any way to get Grass 7.0.5 on ubuntu
> with laz support? Besides compiling it (which I might try later for fun
> and learning).

Probably not if LASzip support in libLAS is required for LAZ support.

LASzip is not redistributable because it contains code from the FastAC
codec which doesn't allow modification, which is incompatible with the
LGPL license of LASzip.

See https://trac.osgeo.org/osgeo/ticket/1341#comment:2 and the links
therein.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] GRASS 7.0.5 and the GDAL GRASS plugin

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/03/2016 01:31 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 10/02/2016 11:53 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> GRASS 7.0.5 has been released and the Debian packages have been updated
>> accordingly and uploaded to unstable. Martin will likely soon update the
>> grass package in ubuntugis-unstable.
>>
>> Because of the tight version requirements for the GDAL GRASS plugin,
>> whenever a new GRASS version is uploaded the libgdal-grass package needs
>> to be rebuilt with that version.
>>
>> For the changes required see this commit for the libgdal-grass 2.1.1
>> package in Debian:
>>
>>  
>> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/gdal-grass.git/commit/?id=cca9c46f23e0c33e2333fe2afb69c49925d75568
>>
>> The incremented version in the build dependencies and the virtual GRASS
>> ABI package are required for the package in UbuntuGIS too. UbuntuGIS
>> still uses GDAL 2.1.0 instead of 2.1.1 as in Debian, so the GDAL version
>> does not need to be incremented nor should the 2.1.1 version from Debian
>> be used (updating GDAL to a new version requires a rebuild of its
>> reverse dependencies).
>>
>> I've prepared branches for UbuntuGIS in gdal-grass git repository on
>> Alioth which only need to be updated for GRASS 7.0.5:
>>
>>  
>> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/gdal-grass.git/log/?h=ubuntu/trusty
>>  
>> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/gdal-grass.git/log/?h=ubuntu/xenial
>>
>> The procedure to create these branches using the source packages from
>> Launchpad is now also documented in the Debian GIS policy:
>>
>>  https://pkg-grass.alioth.debian.org/policy/packaging.html#git-import-dsc
>>
>> There is currently no libgdal-grass package for xenial in the
>> ubuntugis-unstable repository, so adding it now is a good opportunity.
>> I've prepared the ubuntu/xenial branch using the packaging from OSGeo-Live.
>>
>> I've also updated the transition trackers for UbuntuGIS which currently
>> shows libgdal-grass as bad for trusty because it doesn't depend on the
>> grass705 virtual ABI package yet. The tracker for xenial doesn't include
>> libgdal-grass because the package is not available for xenial yet:
>>
>>  
>> http://linuxminded.nl/tmp/pkg-grass-transitions/ubuntugis-unstable/trusty/html/grass.html
>>  
>> http://linuxminded.nl/tmp/pkg-grass-transitions/ubuntugis-unstable/xenial/html/grass.html
>>
>> @Martin, will you update libgdal-grass along with grass for 7.0.5 as
>> I've done for Debian?
> 
> The UbuntuGIS branches for libgdal-grass have been updated for GRASS
> 7.0.5, but they cannot be built yet because the published grass packages
> haven't found their way into the Packages files on the Launchpad APT
> repository and are hence unavailable to cowbuiler chroots.

The grass 7.0.5 packages are now available in the Launchpad APT
repository, so I've rebuilt and uploaded the libgdal-grass packages for
ubuntugis-unstable & -experimental.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] GRASS 7.0.5 and the GDAL GRASS plugin

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/02/2016 11:53 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> GRASS 7.0.5 has been released and the Debian packages have been updated
> accordingly and uploaded to unstable. Martin will likely soon update the
> grass package in ubuntugis-unstable.
> 
> Because of the tight version requirements for the GDAL GRASS plugin,
> whenever a new GRASS version is uploaded the libgdal-grass package needs
> to be rebuilt with that version.
> 
> For the changes required see this commit for the libgdal-grass 2.1.1
> package in Debian:
> 
>  
> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/gdal-grass.git/commit/?id=cca9c46f23e0c33e2333fe2afb69c49925d75568
> 
> The incremented version in the build dependencies and the virtual GRASS
> ABI package are required for the package in UbuntuGIS too. UbuntuGIS
> still uses GDAL 2.1.0 instead of 2.1.1 as in Debian, so the GDAL version
> does not need to be incremented nor should the 2.1.1 version from Debian
> be used (updating GDAL to a new version requires a rebuild of its
> reverse dependencies).
> 
> I've prepared branches for UbuntuGIS in gdal-grass git repository on
> Alioth which only need to be updated for GRASS 7.0.5:
> 
>  https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/gdal-grass.git/log/?h=ubuntu/trusty
>  https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/gdal-grass.git/log/?h=ubuntu/xenial
> 
> The procedure to create these branches using the source packages from
> Launchpad is now also documented in the Debian GIS policy:
> 
>  https://pkg-grass.alioth.debian.org/policy/packaging.html#git-import-dsc
> 
> There is currently no libgdal-grass package for xenial in the
> ubuntugis-unstable repository, so adding it now is a good opportunity.
> I've prepared the ubuntu/xenial branch using the packaging from OSGeo-Live.
> 
> I've also updated the transition trackers for UbuntuGIS which currently
> shows libgdal-grass as bad for trusty because it doesn't depend on the
> grass705 virtual ABI package yet. The tracker for xenial doesn't include
> libgdal-grass because the package is not available for xenial yet:
> 
>  
> http://linuxminded.nl/tmp/pkg-grass-transitions/ubuntugis-unstable/trusty/html/grass.html
>  
> http://linuxminded.nl/tmp/pkg-grass-transitions/ubuntugis-unstable/xenial/html/grass.html
> 
> @Martin, will you update libgdal-grass along with grass for 7.0.5 as
> I've done for Debian?

The UbuntuGIS branches for libgdal-grass have been updated for GRASS
7.0.5, but they cannot be built yet because the published grass packages
haven't found their way into the Packages files on the Launchpad APT
repository and are hence unavailable to cowbuiler chroots.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

[Ubuntu] GDAL reverse dependency rebuilds (was: GRASS 7.0.5 and the GDAL GRASS plugin)

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/02/2016 11:58 PM, Even Rouault wrote:
> Le dimanche 02 octobre 2016 23:53:47, Sebastiaan Couwenberg a écrit :
>> The incremented version in the build dependencies and the virtual GRASS
>> ABI package are required for the package in UbuntuGIS too. UbuntuGIS
>> still uses GDAL 2.1.0 instead of 2.1.1 as in Debian, so the GDAL version
>> does not need to be incremented nor should the 2.1.1 version from Debian
>> be used (updating GDAL to a new version requires a rebuild of its
>> reverse dependencies).
> 
> Just chimming in on this remark. Except if we mess up things, GDAL X.Y.z 
> shoud 
> be binary compatible with GDAL X.Y.Z, even at the C++ level, so normally you 
> shouldn't have to rebuild reverse dependencies

The experience with gdal in Debian hasn't been that great, that's why
the packaging now using a virtual ABI package that changes for every
release (even micro/patch releases). The changes between 2.1.0 and 2.1.1
weren't very worrying (no removed symbols for example, only a couple new
C++ symbols), to be better safe than sorry a transition was still done
and all packages using any C++ symbols were rebuilt. The update to GCC 6
caused a number of symbols changes mostly related to pairs, the reverse
dependencies have not been rebuilt for that because no issues have
surfaced yet. It shows that not all C++ symbols changes break the ABI,
but also that tracking those changes is hard.

Having the C & C++ interfaces provides by separate libraries like GEOS
and libLAS do for example should help if all reverse dependencies manage
to limit themselves to C library, but experience with GOES & libLAS
shows that too many projects still use the C++ library.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

[Ubuntu] GRASS 7.0.5 and the GDAL GRASS plugin

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi all,

GRASS 7.0.5 has been released and the Debian packages have been updated
accordingly and uploaded to unstable. Martin will likely soon update the
grass package in ubuntugis-unstable.

Because of the tight version requirements for the GDAL GRASS plugin,
whenever a new GRASS version is uploaded the libgdal-grass package needs
to be rebuilt with that version.

For the changes required see this commit for the libgdal-grass 2.1.1
package in Debian:

 
https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/gdal-grass.git/commit/?id=cca9c46f23e0c33e2333fe2afb69c49925d75568

The incremented version in the build dependencies and the virtual GRASS
ABI package are required for the package in UbuntuGIS too. UbuntuGIS
still uses GDAL 2.1.0 instead of 2.1.1 as in Debian, so the GDAL version
does not need to be incremented nor should the 2.1.1 version from Debian
be used (updating GDAL to a new version requires a rebuild of its
reverse dependencies).

I've prepared branches for UbuntuGIS in gdal-grass git repository on
Alioth which only need to be updated for GRASS 7.0.5:

 https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/gdal-grass.git/log/?h=ubuntu/trusty
 https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/gdal-grass.git/log/?h=ubuntu/xenial

The procedure to create these branches using the source packages from
Launchpad is now also documented in the Debian GIS policy:

 https://pkg-grass.alioth.debian.org/policy/packaging.html#git-import-dsc

There is currently no libgdal-grass package for xenial in the
ubuntugis-unstable repository, so adding it now is a good opportunity.
I've prepared the ubuntu/xenial branch using the packaging from OSGeo-Live.

I've also updated the transition trackers for UbuntuGIS which currently
shows libgdal-grass as bad for trusty because it doesn't depend on the
grass705 virtual ABI package yet. The tracker for xenial doesn't include
libgdal-grass because the package is not available for xenial yet:

 
http://linuxminded.nl/tmp/pkg-grass-transitions/ubuntugis-unstable/trusty/html/grass.html
 
http://linuxminded.nl/tmp/pkg-grass-transitions/ubuntugis-unstable/xenial/html/grass.html

@Martin, will you update libgdal-grass along with grass for 7.0.5 as
I've done for Debian?

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

[Ubuntu] MapServer 7.0.2 in ubuntugis-unstable

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Triggered by Astrids question on the OSGeo-Live IRC channel, the
MapServer packages for trusty & xenial have been updated to 7.0.2 in
ubuntugis-unstable.

As also discussed on IRC, there is still a major lack of contributors to
UbuntuGIS who actively update the packages for Ubuntu with the changes
from Debian.

Since I will start a new dayjob soon, and already spend all my spare
time on Debian, I cannot actively contribute to UbuntuGIS. People
relying on UbuntuGIS for their geospatial needs should start
contributing to the project. If you need help gaining packaging
experience this is available in the Debian GIS team, which maintains
extensive documentation making it easy to backport packages from Debian
GIS for Ubuntu.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Fwd: [GRASS-dev] ubuntu gis policy

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 09/16/2016 07:14 PM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
> On 09/16/2016 05:29 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> On 09/16/2016 03:45 PM, Micha Silver wrote:
>>> Randal Hale
>>>> I'm one of the guys who was commenting on the confusion. Someone
>>>> commented that the naming is in keeping with Ubuntu policy. Which
>>>> probably for the Sys Admin crowd is perfect. We've got a weird blend
>>>> of Users who want software BUT (and I didn't up until this last
>>>> thread) understand the reasoning behind the naming. It is confusing. I
>>>> don't know if something on the PPA explaining it is warranted OR a
>>>> name change OR something on the package websites.
>>>>
>>> I'd suggest this: (clearest to me, and does not break the known Debian
>>> chain)
>>>
>>> "Experimental" (=Debian testing) --> "Current" (=Debian unstable) -->
>>> "Legacy" (=Debian stable)
>> The above is wrong. Packages in Debian migrate from unstable to testing
>> after a period of 5 to 10 days (depending on urgency of the package, 5
>> days for medium, 10 days for low) assuming no release critical bugs are
>> affecting the version of the package in unstable and all of the required
>> versions of dependencies are in testing or will migrate to testing on
>> the same day as the package in question.
>>
>> Debian testing is therefore less prone to issues than unstable in which
>> active development is done. The experimental repository is used for
>> packages which should not migrate to testing or are otherwise unfit for
>> inclusion in the next Debian stable release via the testing repository.
>> This includes packages which require a transition (rebuilds of all its
>> reverse dependencies) to have a coherent package set migrate to testing.
>> Not all maintainers adhere to this, and uncoordinated transitions are
>> triggered by uploads to unstable which should have gone to experimental
>> first. We've recently had this for libdap & openmpi for example.
>>
>> The flow of packages in Debian is as follows:
>>
>>   (experimental ->) unstable -> testing -> stable
>>
>> New packages are uploaded to unstable by default, or experimental if
>> more work is required before they can migrate to testing (e.g. a
>> transition or wait for the final release in case of beta & RC
>> pre-releases), after the grace period the packages from unstable migrate
>> to testing, packages in testing get frozen eventually in preparation of
>> the next stable release. Because codenames are used for the
>> distributions the packages in testing aren't copied to stable, the
>> stable suite is simply renamed to oldstable and the testing suite to
>> stable. Hence the importance to use release codenames in apt
>> sources.list to stick to your chosen distribution and not be forced to
>> switch when the new stable release is out.
>>
>> Because of the abuse of the ubuntugis-testing repository for
>> experimental packages, that repository should be renamed to reflect its
>> use. Users and administrators of systems using the UbuntuGIS PPAs who
>> are uncomfortable by unpredictable changes should stick to the stable
>> PPA which is only infrequently updated. Reintroducing a testing PPA in
>> which more testing is performed by the users before those packages are
>> moved to the stable is valuable to root out bugs and integration issues,
>> but the UbuntuGIS userbase is not as involved as in Debian so the amount
>> of testing those packages would receive is likely to be very limited if
>> not non-existent. The packages in the UbuntuGIS PPAs are also not
>> subjected to automated QA as the packages in Debian are. Making the
>> value of an UbuntuGIS testing PPA questionable in practice.
>>
>> Most UbuntuGIS users use the unstable PPA because they want newer
>> upstream versions than the packages included in the Ubuntu LTS release,
>> and are not willing to wait until those version become available in the
>> UbuntuGIS stable PPA.
>>
>> Until more development manpower is available, especially someone willing
>> to lead the integration & testing work required for stable releases,
>> discussing the PPA naming is of little to no value. All eyes are focused
>> on the unstable PPA with hardly anyone caring for the other PPAs. If it
>> weren't for the updates from OSGeo-Live the UbuntuGIS PPAs would stop
>> being used due to irrelevance. Having lots of users doesn't mean having
>> enough developers to match. This is common in the Ubuntu world which has
>

Re: [Ubuntu] ubuntugis-experimental PPA (Was: [GRASS-dev] ubuntu gis policy)

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 09/16/2016 06:59 PM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
> +1 to renaming testing to experimental.
> 
> On 09/16/2016 04:23 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
>> I'm in favor of removing testing and adding "experimental" instead.
>>
>> This is closer to the actual way we use the ppa.

Since the three active administrators of the UbuntuGIS PPAs agree this
is the way to go I've acted upon this consensus.

Because PPA URLs cannot be renamed, only the display name changed, I've
created a new ubuntugis-experimental PPA. A dependency on
ubuntugis-unstable has been added to mirror how experimental is an
overlay of unstable in Debian. And the dependency has been removed from
the ubuntugis-testing PPA.

All existing binary packages from the testing PPA have been copied to
the experimental PPA, and removed from the testing PPA. Because the size
of the new PPA is the default 2 GB which is exceeded by the packages
from the testing PPA, I've requested it to be increased to 8 GB to match
the other PPAs:

 https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/397503

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] unstable: providing rcs

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 09/11/2016 11:14 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> 2016-09-11 23:13 GMT+02:00 Martin Landa :
>>> Please upload new packages to Testing.
>>
>> you are referring only to final versions or also RC packages? Thanks, Martin
> 
> to be clear, can I upload 7.0.5RC1 to testing or wait for 7.0.5 (and
> use private PPA for RC packages)? Ma

Uploading release candidates to ubuntugis-testing should be fine. As
discussed in this thread, that PPA is abused for experimental packages.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] libgeos dependency problem in unstable

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 08/24/16 12:43, Martin Weis wrote:

I have 14 LTS here and since a while I cannot install some GIS software.
See the log below for details. There might be a dependency to be updated
somewhere? Its a universe/ppa source mix that contributes to the
problem, see policy below.


Disable the repository which provides QGIS 2.16, it hasn't been built 
with the ubuntugis-unstable dependencies.


qgis from ubuntugis-unstable has the correct dependencies, but is still 
at version 2.14.3.



# LANG=C aptitude install qgis grass qgis-plugin-grass
[...]
Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?] q


You need libgeos-c1v5 from ubuntugis-unstable, not libgeos-c1 from the 
ubuntu repository.


aptitude's first suggestion is usually not very good, but the second 
tends to be better, so chose 'no' instead of 'quit' to get the second 
option.


Or just use apt-get instead of aptitude.

Kind Regards,

Bas

--
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] “libSFCGAL.so.1: undefined symbol” with Postgis 2.2.1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi all,

For those of you not aware of the previous discussion on the postgis
list, see:

 https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/postgis-devel/2016-August/025887.html

And the issue on StackExachange:

 
https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/204575/libsfcgal-so-1-undefined-symbol-upgrading-to-postgis-2-2-2-and-2-2-1

On 08/08/2016 11:11 AM, Luí­s de Sousa wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> I have recently upgraded a workstation to Ubuntu 16.04 and since then I am 
> not able to use PostGis. I have the following set up (from the unstable PPA):
> 
> - postgresql-9.5
> 
> - postgresql-9.5-postgis-2.2 (2.2.1+dfsg-3~xenial0)
> 
> - postgis (2.2.1+dfsg-3~xenial0)
> 
> 
> 
> Whenever I try to create the extension or use anything related to PostGIS I 
> get this error:
> # CREATE EXTENSION postgis; ERROR: could not load library 
> "/usr/lib/postgresql/9.5/lib/postgis-2.2.so": 
> /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libSFCGAL.so.1: undefined symbol: 
> _ZN5osgDB13writeNodeFileERKN3osg4NodeERKNSt7__cxx1112basic_stringIcSt11char_traitsIcESaIcEEEPKNS_7OptionsE
> 
> However, I have the SFCGAL headers and debug symbols installed:
> 
> $ dpkg -l | grep sfcgal ii libsfcgal-dev 1.2.2-1 amd64 Library for ISO 
> 19107:2013 and OGC SFA 1.2 for 3D operations (dev part) ii libsfcgal1 1.2.2-1 
> amd64 Library for ISO 19107:2013 and OGC SFA 1.2 for 3D operations (runtime 
> part) ii sfcgal-bin 1.2.2-1 amd64 Simple viewer for SFCGAL library ii 
> sfcgal-dbg 1.2.2-1 amd64 Debug symbols for SFCGAL
> 
> 
> What is going wrong? Thank you,

You have not answered the OpenSceneGraph related question on
StackExchange. Please post the output for:

 ldd /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libSFCGAL.so

And:

 dpkg -l | egrep "open(scenegraph|threads)"

You probably have the xenial OSG packages installed instead of those
rebuild with the GDAL packages from UbuntuGIS.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Handling transitions in UbuntuGIS

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Angelos,

On 07/26/2016 12:49 AM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
> The transitions have been handled manually so far.
> Thanks for this tracker, it seems a better way to handle things.

I guess manually means running `apt-cache rdepends ` to
determine the reverse dependencies and rebuilding those with new uploads?

There were a number of old packages still included in Packages file,
which I've removed by deleting all superseded packages in the PPA. The
transition trackers look much better now, all geos rdeps in trusty are
now good, and only eoxserver (0.3.2-0~trusty5) still depends on the old
libgdal1h instead of libgdal20.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Handling transitions in UbuntuGIS

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Ivan,

On 07/24/2016 11:54 PM, Ivan Mincik wrote:
> On 24/07/16 03:59, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> Triggered by the recent spatialite-gui report, I've setup an
>> experimental transition tracker for the ubuntugis-unstable PPA to check
>> the state of the other packages.
>>
>> Currently only trusty and xenial are checked, precise is not worth the
>> effort IMNSHO:
>>
>>  http://linuxminded.nl/tmp/pkg-grass-transitions/ubuntugis-unstable/trusty/
>>  http://linuxminded.nl/tmp/pkg-grass-transitions/ubuntugis-unstable/xenial/
>>
>> For trusty seems to need some more rebuilds, xenial is looking good for
>> the xenial packages in the PPA.
> 
> Thank you very much for that effort. State of Trusty confirms that
> transition tracker is very good idea. Are you planning to maintain
> transitions wit Ben for the future ?

Perhaps, if there is sufficient demand to use the transition trackers
for UbuntuGIS too. I'd rather not be the SPOF for changes to the ben
configuration and move it to some ubuntugis team webspace, lacking that
on osgeo.org infrastructure it may be moved to the Debian GIS webspace
on Alioth. Since Alioth doesn't have ben installed the cronjob will need
to run elsewhere and publish to Alioth.

>> Unfortunately the ben tool used for the transition trackers, is not able
>> to handle the Ubuntu repositories + PPA repo setup well, it can only use
>> the Packages files from the PPA, so you don't see the other reverse
>> dependencies available in Ubuntu that haven't been rebuild with the
>> library package in the PPA.
> 
> Is it very complicated to add that support to Ben ?

The biggest hurdle is learning enough OCaml. Templates for the HTML
pages are compiled into some binary format making even that process
complicated.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Spatialite-gui removed after recent updates on 14.04

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 07/23/2016 03:22 PM, Micha Silver wrote:
> After the latest updates to gdal and geos, Spatialite_gui gets removed, and 
> can't be installed:
> 
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
>   spatialite-gui : Depends: libgeos-c1 (>= 3.4.2) but it is not going to be 
> installed
> E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
> 
> This is on a Mint 17.3 system with the ubuntugis-unstable repo.
> 
> I opened a ticket:
> https://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/ticket/78

As reported in the ticket, the spatialite-gui package has been rebuilt
for the geos transition in ubuntugis-unstable.

spatialite-gui (1.7.1-5~trusty3) should be available from the PPA soon.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Where to get a version of libgeos-c1 compatible with libgeos-3.5.0?

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 07/19/2016 01:23 PM, Luí­s de Sousa wrote:
> I do not compile any GIS software, I install everything from the UbuntuGIS 
> PPA. But following your comments, let me step back to the root of this issue. 
> I have libgdal20 installed:

You do have locally built software installed:

> File "/usr/local/lib/python3.4/dist-packages/osgeo/__init__.py", line
21, in 

Uninstall this and install the python-gdal from the ubuntugis-unstable
PPA instead.

> That's what lead me to libgdal1h. Perhaps I should try to get this file from 
> some other package, but which?

As said before libgdal1h is no longer appropriate, libgdal20 has taken
its place. You need to rebuild everything that depends on libgdal1h to
use libgdal20 instead.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki