Re: Finishing ncbi-vdb and sra-sdk

2022-10-10 Thread Aaron M. Ucko
"Aaron M. Ucko" writes: > u...@debian.org (Aaron M. Ucko) writes: > >> Ah, right, sra-sdk will need to go through NEW too -- the ngs-sdk code >> it absorbed underwent an SONAME bump along the way. (All necessary >> ncbi-vdb changes passed NEW a few weeks ago, but ncbi-vdb 3.x is sitting >> in ex

Re: Finishing ncbi-vdb and sra-sdk

2022-10-10 Thread Aaron M. Ucko
u...@debian.org (Aaron M. Ucko) writes: > Ah, right, sra-sdk will need to go through NEW too -- the ngs-sdk code > it absorbed underwent an SONAME bump along the way. (All necessary > ncbi-vdb changes passed NEW a few weeks ago, but ncbi-vdb 3.x is sitting > in experimental until sra-sdk joins it

Re: [Help] anfo: ftbfs with GCC-12

2022-10-10 Thread Andreas Tille
Am Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 11:15:59AM +0200 schrieb Steffen Moeller: > > Formally, yes. But upstream just got a nobel price for their work - that > work. We should not remove this now but in contrary work with upstream > to think of some way to nicely archive their work with us and maybe they > could

Re: [Help] anfo: ftbfs with GCC-12

2022-10-10 Thread Steffen Moeller
Am 10.10.2022 um 10:04 schrieb Nilesh Patra: On 10 October 2022 11:50:14 am IST, Andreas Tille wrote: If no one gets to it, asking for removal is a sensible option. It otherwise imho becomes another time sapping package that no one cares about much. There was no volunteer to pick up the gc

Re: [Help] anfo: ftbfs with GCC-12

2022-10-10 Thread Nilesh Patra
On 10 October 2022 11:50:14 am IST, Andreas Tille wrote: >> If no one gets to it, asking for removal is a sensible option. It otherwise >> imho becomes another time sapping package that no one cares about much. > >There was no volunteer to pick up the gcc-12 port of this package. So >it seems