On vendredi 22 septembre 2017 13:07:36 CEST Angelos Tzotsos wrote: > On 09/22/2017 11:34 AM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 10:37 PM, Angelos Tzotsos <gcpp.kal...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> We should plan to make the transition on ubuntugis-experimental before > >> moving to unstable. > > > > I agree. > > > > Are there any packages beside gdal for which people have an interest > > in an updated version? > > I don't know whether we should only bump gdal or try importing most of > > the packages we have in xenial right now. > > > > Kind Regards, > > Johan > > Just to be on the safe side, I would just try to rebuild all current > packages on top of recent gdal. > If issues arise, we can do more upgrades.
Note that rebuilding might not be enough. While recompilation might work fine, some packages might not be completely compatible with GDAL 2.2 without adjustements at source code level (they should not crash normally, but might have not expected behaviour) See https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/browser/branches/2.2/gdal/MIGRATION_GUIDE.TXT Particularly the RFC 67 changes have required changes at least in QGIS, Fiona and perhaps r- gdal or something related to it (can't remember exactly) Even -- Spatialys - Geospatial professional services http://www.spatialys.com
_______________________________________________ UbuntuGIS mailing list Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki
