Discussion:
Bug#944361: cgal: cgal 5.0 released
(too old to reply)
Nico Schlömer
2019-11-08 15:20:01 UTC
Permalink
Package: libcgal-dev
Version: 4.14-5
Severity: wishlist
File: cgal

CGAL 5.0 has been released this afternoon.

I'd love to take a stab at it, but apparently the debian sources aren't on
salsa yet. Any chance of moving them there?



-- System Information:
Debian Release: buster/sid
APT prefers eoan-updates
APT policy: (500, 'eoan-updates'), (500, 'eoan'), (100, 'eoan-backports')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 5.3.0-19-generic (SMP w/8 CPU cores)
Kernel taint flags: TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE, TAINT_DIE, TAINT_OOT_MODULE
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled

Versions of packages libcgal-dev:amd64 depends on:
ii libboost-dev 1.67.0.2
ii libboost-program-options-dev 1.67.0.2
ii libboost-system-dev 1.67.0.2
ii libboost-thread-dev 1.67.0.2
ii libcgal13 4.14-5
ii libgmp-dev [libgmp10-dev] 2:6.1.2+dfsg-4
ii libmpfr-dev 4.0.2-1
ii zlib1g-dev 1:1.2.11.dfsg-1ubuntu3

libcgal-dev:amd64 recommends no packages.

Versions of packages libcgal-dev:amd64 suggests:
pn libmpfi-dev <none>
pn libntl-dev <none>
ii libtbb-dev 2019~U8-1

-- no debconf information
Nico Schlömer
2019-11-08 18:10:01 UTC
Permalink
Alright, thanks for the update! (I didn't even know there was discussion
about git atm.)
tag 944361 +pending
thanks
Hi,
I did not see any release announcement for CGAL 5.0 final yet, only for
Beta 2.
Thanks for your offer to help, but I'm already working on updating the
packaging
and in contact with upstream to get the last problems fixed. Updating the
packaging requires non-trivial changes due to the header-only mode now
being the
default. Also, CGAL 5.0 will need to go to experimental first and needs a
transition slot.
Yes, the package is not on salsa yet. I plan to do that eventually, but
wanted
to wait for the outcome of the currently ongoing discussion about git
packaging.
Joachim
Loading...