Orthanc 0.7.2

Hi Andreas, Following our discussion of this morning [1], I have just updated the DebianMed repository with the newest upstream version of Orthanc (0.7.2) [2]. This release includes an adaptation of the " detect-endian.patch" from Adam Conrad [3], that has also been applied upstre

Orthanc 0.7.2 backport of wheezy

Hi Sebastien, Thank you for packaging orthanc -- it looks very interesting! I wonder -- are there big showstoppers which would forbid its backport for wheezy? At some point (0.4.0 iirc) I have tried to build it for wheezy but then got stuck while backporting also some of the dependencies... Chee

Re: Orthanc 0.7.2 backport of wheezy

Hi Yaroslav, On 01/13/2014 04:14 AM, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: Thank you for packaging orthanc -- it looks very interesting! I wonder -- are there big showstoppers which would forbid its backport for wheezy? At some point (0.4.0 iirc) I have tried to build it for wheezy but then got stuck while

Re: Orthanc 0.7.2 backport of wheezy

Hi, On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 01:31:29PM +0100, Sebastien Jodogne wrote: > ... > However, I do not know whether this is the proper way of doing > things with respect to Debian policy: When doing backporting, is it > OK for the build system to build third-party dependencies, without > backporting the

Re: Orthanc 0.7.2 backport of wheezy

Hi Andreas and Yaroslav, I was not able either to find a complete "backporting handbook" for Debian Med packages: Andreas, is there such a guide available somewhere? I admit I'm quite lazy with backports and while I definitely think this is a reasonable task I somehow consider it "Somebody Els

Re: Orthanc 0.7.2 backport of wheezy

On Mon, 13 Jan 2014, Sebastien Jodogne wrote: > >I admit I'm quite lazy with backports and while I definitely think this > >is a reasonable task I somehow consider it "Somebody Else's Problem". > >I simply need to restrict my field of work. > Yes, you are perfectly right. > Yaroslav, I have jus

should google-glog be ok with libunwind7-dev? [Was: Orthanc 0.7.2 backport of wheezy]

Hi Daigo, I have looked at the packporting of orthanc for Wheezy. orthanc uses google-glog and that one currently build-depends on libunwind8-dev. It seems to build (including the build-time testing -- thanks for enabling those!) fine using libunwind7-dev, so I thought to check with you - if

Re: should google-glog be ok with libunwind7-dev? [Was: Orthanc 0.7.2 backport of wheezy]

Thanks to Daigo's -2 of glog with suggested tune up of build-depends, I have uploaded backport build of orthanc for wheezy straight into NeuroDebian wheezy just to give it a try... initial catch was the re-located *.dic files provided by libdcmtk2 (under /usr/share/dcmtk in wheezy and /usr/share/l

Re: should google-glog be ok with libunwind7-dev? [Was: Orthanc 0.7.2 backport of wheezy]

t was "Loading the external DICOM dictionary" without any failure/error msg following. This is very strange. Here is what I get when I use a bad path to the dictionaries, with Orthanc 0.7.2: jodogne@rth-l-0065:~/Subversion/Orthanc/Build$ ./Orthanc W0213 09:51:43.822284 10679 OrthancIni

Re: should google-glog be ok with libunwind7-dev? [Was: Orthanc 0.7.2 backport of wheezy]

he external DICOM dictionary" without any > >failure/error msg following. > This is very strange. Here is what I get when I use a bad path to > the dictionaries, with Orthanc 0.7.2: > jodogne@rth-l-0065:~/Subversion/Orthanc/Build$ ./Orthanc that was in the logs orthanc produced