Re: Forbid parallel build with DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS
On Monday 31 August 2015 11:57:44 Corentin Desfarges wrote: > Concerning the issue 797475 [1], is there any way to forbid parallel build > for my package ? Correct way to do that would be to pass "--max-parallel=1" to "dh" (or perhaps only to `dh_auto_build`). Sometimes you may get away with value 2 or higher. Please do not set DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS from "debian/rules" -- it is wrong. -- Cheers, Dmitry Smirnov. --- Perhaps is is better to be irresponsible and right, than to be responsible and wrong. -- Winston Churchill signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Please update from ITK v3 to v4 [Re: RM: insighttoolkit -- ROM; Obsoleted by insighttoolkit4]
On Wednesday 12 August 2015 22:01:36 Steve M. Robbins wrote: > Could those package maintainers update to v4, please? First ITK-4 needs to be re-build for GCC-5 transition. At the moment "ginkgocadx" FTBFS in "unstable" (but not in "testing") due to libstdc++6 : Breaks: libinsighttoolkit4.7 (<= 4.7.2-2) but 4.7.2-2 is to be installed. -- Best wishes, Dmitry Smirnov. --- You have to start with the truth. The truth is the only way that we can get anywhere. Because any decision-making that is based upon lies or ignorance can't lead to a good conclusion. -- Julian Assange, 2010 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
GinkgoCADx is finished :(
Hi team, Today I've learned that MetaEmotion (developer of Ginkgo CADx) was acquired by Nielsen [1] who apparently have no interest in medical software (Ginkgo CADx in particular) and seems to have no appreciation to free software. Development of Ginkgo CADx appears to be ceased and most likely there will be no new releases. If anyone wants to fork GinkgoCADx, now will be a good time to do so. -- ## Current status in Debian: I've updated "ginkgocadx" repository with fixes required to build it with "libinsighttoolkit4-dev" and with GCC-5. Due to current state of GCC-5 transition it is not yet possible to build "ginkgocadx" in "sid" because of unmet dependencies: libstdc++6 : Breaks: libinsighttoolkit4.7 (<= 4.7.2-2) but 4.7.2-2 is to be installed. The biggest problem is that something else has changed and "-DNDEBUG" no longer helps to avoid asserts with WX-3.0 so GinkgoCADx crashes with errors like this: usr/include/wx-3.0/wx/strvararg.h(456): assert "(argtype & (wxFormatStringSpecifier::value)) == argtype" failed in wxArgNormalizer(): format specifier doesn't match argument type Unfortunately I can't fix those type mismatches on my own... [1]: http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=303052091 -- Regards, Dmitry Smirnov. --- The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is. -- Winston Churchill signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Please help to nail GinkgoCADx bugs in Debian
Hi Carlos, It's been a while but we need your help again to squash some bugs in GinkgoCADx. I'm especially concerned about recent FTBFS in "unstable": https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=789932 as well as about FTBFS with GCC-5: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=777876 Also there is an old (unfixed for a while) problem with displaying studies: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=753809 You can find list of all GinkgoCADx bugs here: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=ginkgocadx I hope you'll be able to help. Thank you. -- Regards, Dmitry Smirnov --- If any remedy is tested under controlled scientific conditions and proved to be effective, it will cease to be alternative and will simply become medicine. So-called alternative medicine either hasn't been tested or it has failed its tests. -- Richard Dawkins, 2007 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: openmolar (dental practice management): ITP
Hi Andreas, On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 09:00:03 Andreas Tille wrote: > [moving to Debian Med user list to get a more fitting audience] O boy, I wasn't subscribed to that one... :) > On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 06:44:56PM +1100, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: > > I failed to re-use (i.e. unarchive/reopen) old ITP #564285 so perhaps a > > new ITP is to be filed. > > I guess it does not really matter. For me "closing" this archived bug > in the changelog is fine. Finally the ITP is to make sure that people > are not doing a competing packaging effort and I do not assume that > currently somebody else is working on openmolar in parallel. It makes sense to me... > > Andreas, how would you like to proceed? Do you want "openmolar" in > > experimental or in unstable? Thanks. > > If you regard it "usable" unstable is fine. You might add a warning in > the long description about "no guarantee that the package is doing > anything useful / expect a loss of all your data / blabla" or whatever. > I'd also add a verbose README.Debian to clarify the status of the > package. Thank you for explanation and for advice. I added brief README.Debian that I think would be just enough to warn. > I think the classification experimental / unstable is more from a Debian > point of view to get some technical (library dependency) stuff tested in > a sandbox. If users might simply miss the existance of openmolar because > it is hidden in experimental which is not in their sources.list it is > like "not packaged" which is not really in the interest of our users. > > People using software declared as *beta* should know what they are doing > and we are just taking over the job of simplifying their work to install > the software ... and for sure we try to make it as good as possible - > but not better. That's a breath of clarity. :) Very well said. > Thanks for working on this The pleasure is mine. I'm going to upload (to "unstable") this evening. -- Regards, Dmitry Smirnov. --- We occasionally stumble over the truth but most of us pick ourselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened. -- Winston Churchill signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
