On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 11:04:35AM -0500, Jan Schaumann wrote:
> brook@biology.nmsu.edu wrote:
>  
> > I believe that the gdal package originated from our work so I'm glad
> > it is of use.  However, we have recently split it into several
> > (gdal-lib, gdal-docs, and gdal (a metapackage)) so as to isolate the
> > dependencies on doxygen, teTeX, ... .
> 
> Ah, that's nice.
> 
> > If you could send me the updates you made to the gdal package we can
> > try to fold them into our new set.  Or are those already committed in
> > wip?
> 
> I don't know - I don't think there were many modifications.  If you want
> to check the differences between wip and my package, just download my
> files from the URL in the previous mail and diff it against pkgsrc-wip.

The gdal package in pkgsrc-wip depends on wip/geos2 which I couldn't
see anywhere.

I also did a gdal package some time ago, but didn't bother splitting
into docs and lib sub-packages, so yours is nicer.  I also did a grass
package (and remember having to make shedloads of patches for non-root
builds, but that's rather tangential to the gdal packages).

Regards,
Alistair