On Jun 4, 9:19 am, Timothy G Abbott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Tim,
> The first bunch of SAGE dependencies entered the Debian NEW queue (the > queue of packages waiting for review from the Debian ftpmasters before > they are uploaded to Debian unstable) tonight; by tomorrow I expect that > that the remaining SAGE dependencies will enter the Debian NEW queue. w00t. As other have already expressed their thanks let me get in line to thank you for a great job well done ;) > I am thus currently optimistic that we will be able to get SAGE 3.0.3 or > 3.0.4 into Debian Lenny. > > There are a few potential issues involved: > > - The Debian polybori package is polybori 0.4, which includes a number of > upstream fixes that made packaging it for Debian easier. SAGE is still at > 0.3; I would thus greatly appreciate it if SAGE 3.03 were to be using > polybori 0.4 as well (this is #3264). Since malb asked: anybody can do the upgrade, but we will need to do some testing. Please make sure to build off the latest polybori.spkg in 3.0.2 since there are Cygwin fixes in there. Those can be partially removed since Alexander Dreyer did suggest some fixes in custom.py IIRC that do not require changes to the code itself. That being said it will be quick to fix any Cygwin issue this upgrade might introduce and given the choice between PolyBoRi 0.4 and a broken Cygwin I can definitely live with the broken Cygwin for a week or two. It is also important that we test if linking dynamically works again since that is also supposed to be fixed. As is that issue is a blocker for pbuild on OSX in 32 bit mode since linking with the static libraries foes wrong. > - I've also packaged guava 3.5, which contains a number of upstream fixes > to various minor packaging problems. I would really appreciate it if SAGE > were to upgrade to guava 3.5 so that I can be sure things will be > compatible (this is #3337). Yep, that should be easy enough. rlm? > - I've also packaged sympow 1.019 rather than sympow 1.018; that change is > negligible and doesn't affect any APIs, so I'm not concerned about this > breaking things. The same here, but I do not recall if we ever attempted to upgrade or not. The upgrade to Sympow 1.019 is now #3360. > - At the moment, I have not uploaded a package for flintqs, because it is > my understanding that the flintqs spkg will be replaced by the quadratic > sieve in flint in the not-far-off future. Correct me if this is not the > case. (Ideally, SAGE would do this before but I can live with this not > being the case). That is correct to my knowledge and there seems to be no good reason to not switch to the current flint codebase and dump flintqs. Volunteers? > - At the moment, I have not uploaded a package for linbox_wrap because I > expect it to be merged into mainline linbox in the next 10 days or so. Clement: Any update on this? > If there are likely to be any other dependency spkgs that are scheduled > for updates in the 3.0.3 or 3.0.4 release cycles, I would like to hear > about them so that I can plan accordingly. The plan is to upgarde clisp and Maxima to the latest (2.45 and 5.15.0) releases. We need a clisp upgrade for Solaris x86-64 and might was well do Maxima at the same time. Aside from that we might do a couple small, incremental upgrades, i.e. ipython to 0.8.4 for example, but nothing sweeping. > -Tim Abbott Cheers, Michael --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
