Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 10 May 2011 14:56:17 +0100
From:      Anton Shterenlikht <mexas@bristol.ac.uk>
To:        Stephen Montgomery-Smith <stephen@missouri.edu>
Cc:        ports@freebsd.org, koziol@hdfgroup.org, thierry@freebsd.org, "maho@FreeBSD.org" <maho@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Why so many versions of the port science/hdf?
Message-ID:  <20110510135616.GA8679@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <4DC937FE.7090602@missouri.edu>
References:  <4DC937FE.7090602@missouri.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 08:05:02AM -0500, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
> Why are there three versions of science/hdf in the ports?
> 
> This is causing problems for me when I try to build the port 
> octave-forge.  As dependencies, it calls in the octave port (which 
> currently defaults to hdf5), the cgnslib port (which uses hdf5-18), and 
> the opendx port (which uses hdf).  All of these ports function perfectly 
> well with hdf5.18, because all the different versions of hdf conflict 
> with each other.
> 
> If we could settle on using hdf5-18 throughout, that would be great.  (I 
> currently maintain opendx, so that would be something I can fix.)
> 
> Are there ports that need hdf but don't build with hdf5-18?

science/paraview is currently built with hdf5.
Perhaps you should ask its maintainer, devel@stasyan.com,
whether hdf5-18 is a good idea.

-- 
Anton Shterenlikht
Room 2.6, Queen's Building
Mech Eng Dept
Bristol University
University Walk, Bristol BS8 1TR, UK
Tel: +44 (0)117 331 5944
Fax: +44 (0)117 929 4423



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110510135616.GA8679>