On 11-02-16 21:17, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: > On 11-02-16 18:37, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: >> On 07-02-16 23:32, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: >>> That removes all the blockers for the transition to GDAL 2.0, so may we >>> may want to do that instead of 1.11.4. Although the GDAL 2.0 packages >>> will need to pass NEW again causing delays. I prefer transitioning to >>> 1.11.4 first because of that. >> >> I just remembered that OTB doesn't support GDAL 2.0 yet, it wasn't on my >> radar because it's still in NEW. >> >> After the transition to 1.11.4, we need to evaluate how much work is >> required to backport the GDAL 2.0 changes that OTB upstream is working on. > > Further inspection shows that OTB 5.2 does have support GDAL 2.0, but it > FTBFS in irrespective of the GDAL version used. Hopefully that's fixed > in the recently released 5.2.1 (which is not on SF yet). I'm having a go > at updating the otb package for 5.2.1 now.
OTB doesn't support ITK 4.9.0 yet, it removed some headers OTB relies on, issue reported in: https://bugs.orfeo-toolbox.org/view.php?id=1142 If otb gets accepted before GDAL 2.0 is available in unstable and otb manages to migrate to testing, the inability to rebuild otb will be a blocker for the transition. Fortunately one we can easily solve with an RC bug. Kind Regards, Bas -- GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1 Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146 50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
