On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 09:33:36AM +0200, Johannes Ring wrote: > On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Julien Cristau <jcris...@debian.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 08:43:54 +0200, Johannes Ring wrote: > > > >> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:05 AM, Cyril Brulebois <k...@debian.org> wrote: > >> > Johannes Ring <joha...@simula.no> (31/05/2012): > >> >> python-ufc needs to be rebuilt against the latest swig (2.0.7). Please > >> >> binNMU it. > >> >> > >> >> nmu python-ufc_2.0.5-2 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild against swig 2.0.7, see > >> >> #675207.' > >> > > >> > if this package has such strict dependencies on swig, why aren't they > >> > exposed through strict package dependencies? > >> > >> You mean by adding something like "swig2.0 (>= 2.0.7)" in > >> Build-Depends? The thing is that UFC only depends on SWIG >= 2.0.0, > >> however, it will always need to be rebuilt whenever a new SWIG release > >> enters the archive. Can this be automated or will I need to request a > >> binNMU each time? > >> > > That sounds broken. Why is that necessary? > > When you run DOLFIN, efficient low-level C++ code (UFC) is > automatically generated. This is done using SWIG and the SWIG version > needs to be the same that was used when building UFC and DOLFIN. > > I'm Cc'ing the DOLFIN list to get more input on this. > > Johannes
Does this break because we check the SWIG version in the JIT compiler, or because it actually breaks (with some link error)? -- Anders -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120613191510.GL2562@glaurung
