On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Sylvestre Ledru <sylves...@debian.org> wrote: > Le lundi 29 août 2011 à 13:31 +0100, Alastair McKinstry a écrit : >> On 2011-08-29 07:14, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: >> > On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 4:35 AM, Steve M. Robbins<st...@sumost.ca> wrote: >> >> I think the rest of this thread got off onto a tangent. In my mind, >> >> the germane question is not why Paraview embeds a patched VTK source >> >> tree but, rather: why is the paraview binary package now installing >> >> the VTK tools like vtkWrapPython? >> > Indeed, that's the actual issue. Thanks Steve. >> > >> >> Why does a running paraview binary need vtkWrapPython? >> > That was also my initial question. >> > >> >> Can it be stuck into /usr/lib/paraview to avoid the conflict? >> > I believe the only outstanding issue is that VTK 5.8 is not released >> > yet. Therefore vtkWrapPython* tools from ParaView 3.10 are much more >> > advanced (more options) than that of VTK 5.6. >> I am also awaiting VTK 5.8 for VisIt packaging. Perhaps we should consider >> doing an vtk5.8 package in experimental, to discover issues and report them >> ahead of time to VTK / VisIT / Paraview developers ? >> > Good idea. > Are you volunteering for it? :)
I'll do it. Meanwhile could someone please NMU vtk-5.6 with the proper fix and fix for lintian. Thanks, -- Mathieu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
