From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add gctp
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 15:02:47 +0200
Message-ID: <87r3arnloo.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <20160625172131.GC21038@jasmine>
	<20160627.210754.1991645543107797665.post@thomasdanckaert.be>
	<20160701203312.GA27184@jasmine>
	<20160707.094018.564247646166673024.post@thomasdanckaert.be>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51564)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1bP8CG-0005so-9C
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 09:02:57 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1bP8CB-0001Gh-AL
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 09:02:56 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20160707.094018.564247646166673024.post@thomasdanckaert.be>
	(Thomas Danckaert's message of "Thu, 07 Jul 2016 09:40:18 +0200
	(CEST)")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Thomas Danckaert <post@thomasdanckaert.be>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

Thomas Danckaert <post@thomasdanckaert.be> skribis:

> From: Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add gctp
> Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 16:33:12 -0400
>
>> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 09:07:54PM +0200, Thomas Danckaert wrote:
>>> Indeed, I believe GCTP is not maintained anymore, and each project
>>> using it makes a few small adjustments. From the changelog, it
>>> seems GCTP was last changed March 1998.
>> In this case, I think it's appropriate to use the bundled GCTP. What
>> do others think?
>
> It's not a lot of work to submit a patch for HDF-EOS5 with the bundled
> GCTP, but I'm afraid that other packages which depend on two libraries
> that each bundle (a version of) GCTP (such as HDF-EOS2 and HDF-EOS5),
> will run into problems. There would be either a conflict due to
> multiple versions of libGctp, or, if we statically include GCTP in the
> libraries that use it, conflicting symbols when we link those
> libraries, no?
>
> For this reason, maybe using a separate GCTP package, and adding a
> patch to projects that use it, is the best solution after all?
> Development of GCTP and most packages that depend on it seems to be
> mostly finished anyway, so maintaining the patches might not be that
> much work.

Leo, what=E2=80=99s your take on this?  It seems we=E2=80=99ve forgotten ab=
out this
patch for too long already.  :-)

Thanks,
Ludo=E2=80=99.