[El] GDAL 1.7.3 in elgis-testing

[Ralph Apel]

Yes, I'll do. Please confirm the alternative sonames for the iioext
patched stuff.

On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 01:55 +0530, Viji V Nair wrote:
> Hi Ralf
> 
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 1:51 AM, Ralph Apel <r.apel at r-apel.de> wrote:
> > AFAIK and remember, geoserver requires geotools which requires
> > imageio-ext which in turn will require its own patched version of the
> > gdal java binding.
> 
> Yes, its a chain. Thank you so much for the remainder.
> 
> Can we stick on the separate package gdal-java-imageio? Would it be
> possible for you to find some time and patch the classes with new
> sonames?
> 
> Thanks
> Viji
> 
> >
> > On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 01:36 +0530, Viji V Nair wrote:
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Mathieu Baudier <mbaudier at argeo.org> wrote:
> >> >>> we would need to decide whether to have only one soname pointing either
> >> >>> to the "normal" or to the iioext "real" file or to have different
> >> >>> sonames (in different packages, of course +1). If we use differing
> >> >>> sonames, the iomageio-ext classes will have to be patched to look for
> >> >>> that differing .so
> >> >>
> >> >> I would suggest different sonames in different package. This will be
> >> >> safer and we can have a separate package.
> >> >>
> >> >> Mathieu, what do u think?
> >> >
> >> > I don't have much experience with JNI packaging but this indeed seems safer.
> >> > I think that this very unlikely that people would use both at the same time.
> >> >
> >> > The question also is: which one would have as a dependency a package
> >> > like, say, geoserver?
> >>
> >> Requires: gdal-java-imageio
> >>
> >> Ralf, what do you say?
> >>
> >> > Event though the one without imageio-ext is "purer", esp. from a FLOSS
> >> > point of view, most people would probably aim at the best
> >> > performances.
> >> > That is were the alternatives mechanism would be handy.
> >> >
> >> > As Ralph suggested, let's try and test.
> >> > An important part of the test would be to make sure that there is no
> >> > side-effect on non-java stuff so that we can push GDAL 1.7.3 to stable
> >> > quickly (that fact that we are doing this work now is independent from
> >> > this maintenance release, so it should not be kept "hostage").
> >>
> >> There wont be any side effects to other non java stuffs, should work
> >> properly as we are not even touching that part. I am almost finished
> >> with the new spec, just thinking about the best way to pack the imgeio
> >> jnis so that we can enter into the testing phase.
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Many thanks to you both for your patience!
> >> > I'm very excited to see a proper packaging for GIS Java apps around
> >> > the corner...
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > el mailing list
> >> > el at lists.osgeo.org
> >> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/el
> >> >
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Viji
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> el mailing list
> >> el at lists.osgeo.org
> >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/el
> >
> >