Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 11 May 2011 20:32:57 -0500
From:      Stephen Montgomery-Smith <stephen@missouri.edu>
To:        "ports@FreeBSD.org" <ports@freebsd.org>, "koziol@hdfgroup.org" <koziol@hdfgroup.org>
Cc:        "maho@FreeBSD.org" <maho@freebsd.org>, "thierry@FreeBSD.org" <thierry@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Why so many versions of the port science/hdf?
Message-ID:  <4DCB38C9.1040000@missouri.edu>
In-Reply-To: <4DC937FE.7090602@missouri.edu>
References:  <4DC937FE.7090602@missouri.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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?
>
> Thanks, Stephen
>    

Well I feel pretty dumb.  Actually it is my port, opendx, that needs the 
original hdf port.  I forgot to enable "WITH_HDF" before testing it!

Stephen


Stephen




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4DCB38C9.1040000>