On 01/-9/-28163 03:59 AM, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
the compatibility mode is there for a reason: to allow old code being
safely used without changes. If your code use the new api should also be able
to use the 1.8 api explicitly and not rely upon the 1.8/1.6 choice
done by third parties. If
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 02:53:27PM +0800, Chun-Chung Chen wrote:
>
> There probably should be libhdf5-*-1.6-dev packages for the people
> wanting the old API. Or, if it is really desired to have
> libhdf5-*-dev meant for 1.6, there should at least be
> libhdf5-*-1.8-dev packages that provide a way
On 06/22/2010 05:06 PM, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> This approach is unviable. They would required different sonames and
> libnames to allow the different libraries and API to cohexist. Something
> that definitively breaks compatibility against upstream and causes
> serious headaches to develop
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 04:31:35PM +0200, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> Package: hdf5
> Severity: wishlist
>
> Hello,
>
> Could you consider the new upstream release of HDF5 (1.8.5) ?
>
> Thanks
> Sylvestre
>
Not before squeeze release.
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
___
Le mardi 22 juin 2010 à 15:24 +0200, Francesco P. Lovergine a écrit :
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 04:31:35PM +0200, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> >
> > Could you consider the new upstream release of HDF5 (1.8.5) ?
> >
> > Thanks
> > Sylvestre
> >
>
> Not before squeeze release.
No worries.
Thanks for
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 10:28:46PM +0200, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> Package: hdf5
> Severity: wishlist
>
> Hello,
>
> It would be nice if you could consider the usage of update-alternative
> for the hdf5 libraries.
> For now, it is not possible to have both hdf5 and hdf5-mpi packages on the
> same
6 matches
Mail list logo
