Hello Julian, On Sat, 2012-01-21 at 16:49 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > Hi, > > it seems there's currently a move from petsc and slepc 3.1 to 3.2 in > sid. In addition to the library package names changing, presumably > because the new versions are not binary-compatible, the devel package > were also renamed, from libpetsc3.1-dev and libslepc3.1-dev to > libpetsc3.2-dev and libslepc3.2-dev. Which is a problem, because it > means every single reverse dependency would need debian/control changes. > > Is the new petsc/slepc API really completely incompatible with 3.1, such > that all reverse dependencies need source changes to cope with 3.2? If > not, what's the reason for changing the -dev package names? If yes, was > the change coordinated with the reverse deps so things don't stay broken > for too long?
I announced it to debian-science a month ago, but didn't coordinate beyond that. :-( Sorry! > Is anyone willing to take care of making this happen? I'm working on this for my packages (see below). > FWIW the affected packages seem to be: > - deal.ii deal.II detects the PETSc version and acts accordingly, I believe 7.1.0 will work through 3.2. I need to work on upgrading from 7.0.0 to 7.1.0. > - dolfin > - feel++ > - gmsh > - illuminator Illuminator has major problems -- the PETSc object on which all of illuminator is based has changed drastically. This will require major upstream surgery, and the new version will not be data-compatible with the old. Since upstream is me, I can tell you I will not have time for the foreseeable future (couple of months at least) to port illuminator to PETSc 3.2. It will need to come out of testing when PETSc transitions. :-( > - libmesh Should be okay like deal.II, though I haven't touched libMesh in a long time... Can't speak for the others (dolfin, feel++, gmsh). -Adam -- GPG fingerprint: D54D 1AEE B11C CE9B A02B C5DD 526F 01E8 564E E4B6 Engineering consulting with open source tools http://www.opennovation.com/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
