-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 447
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
formerly caught bgzf_idx_amend_last symbol #1722
Comments
Nevermind the parenthesis about cyvcf2 test failure, there is work in progress on their side to get the code compatible with htslib 1.19; see brentp/cyvcf2#290. |
Yes, it was dropped deliberately in PR #1672, although it looks like I forgot to remove the prototype from Since PR #1560, htslib has symbol versioning via |
Hi Rob, |
As noted in samtools#1722, this function was removed in PR samtools#1672.
* Ignore and clean test/*/FAIL* for six subdirectories These files can appear in base_mods, fastq, mpileup, and sam_filter as well as faidx and tabix. * Fix comment header to use `@CO\t` as per other comment headers * Remove extraneous inclusion and add missing dependency * Remove last traces of previously deleted bgzf_idx_amend_last() As noted in #1722, this function was removed in PR #1672. * Use isspace_c() et al in annot-tsv.c * Minor corrections to system headers Plain getopt() is declared in <unistd.h>; strcasecmp() et al are only portably declared in <strings.h>.
Greetings,
I'm trying to bump the htslib suite to version 1.19 in Debian sid, and symbols tracking caught the drop of the bgzf_idx_amend_last function. As far as I understand, this function was not supposed to be part of the ABI in the first place, given its declaration in hts_internal.h. Besides, running the test suites of the many reverse dependencies, without rebuilding them first, does not raise any ill effects (except perhaps cyvcf2, which seems to have a test item failing to write VCF4.1 files properly, but as far as I can see, it is unrelated to the missing symbol). So the function does not look to have made it to the ABI by accident to consumers of the htslib.
Just checking, may I go ahead with the missing symbol without soversion bump, or was the drop actually unintended?
Have a nice day, :)
Étienne.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: