On 28 December 2021 at 17:44, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
| On 12/28/21 17:17, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > | Your comments regarding builds suggests that tiledb isn't very stable
| > | yet, so even if the package get actively maintained, building on top of
| > | it may not be wise.
| >
| >
On 12/28/21 17:17, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| Your comments regarding builds suggests that tiledb isn't very stable
| yet, so even if the package get actively maintained, building on top of
| it may not be wise.
Hm, can you help me here and be more specific what section or sentence gave
you
Hi Bas,
[ And first off thanks for all you work -- I do of course rely on it in
e.g. backtesting all possible Rcpp, RcppArmadillo, ... changes for my own
upstream R packages on a Debian testing box. Having all of gdal, proj,
geos, ... in good shape is huge. And a maintainer of (many, but
On 12/28/21 15:39, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
4) TileDB 1.7.7 in Debian -- There is a packaging attempt of a more minimal
TileDB configuration in unstable, with a number of build issues on other
platforms. We have since changed quite a few things in TileDB (i.e. no more
TBB) and had a number of
Greetings,
As both a Debian'er and a TileDB employee, I had looked a few times into
packaging TileDB for Debian. The good news is that I currently have something
in my own informal PPA (see below) -- including rebuilds of the gdal and pdal
packages taken from ubuntugis-unstable.
Some related
