On Dec 1, 9:11 pm, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Dec 1, 2008, at 8:54 PM, mabshoff wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 1, 8:51 pm, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >> On Dec 1, 2008, at 8:42 PM, mabshoff wrote:
>
> >>> On Dec 1, 8:40 pm, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> I just noticed for m4ri the package is called libm4ri-*.spkg. Any
> >>>> reason this isn't m4ri-*.spkg?
>
> >>> That is the name malb gave it initially and it just stuck. The same
> >>> applies for libfplll.spkg, too.
>
> >> Well, could I propose we change it?
>
> > Fine by me, it could be done with a little magic to deps. But why
> > would you want to do so? For m1ri I would guess?
>
> Just for consistency. I actually had trouble finding it (first looked
> for m*, then unpacked linbox to see if it was in there...)
Ok, currently we have the following in the tree:
Sprocketer:~ michaelabshoff$ cd Desktop/sage-3.2.1.rc1-qf/spkg/
standard/
Sprocketer:standard michaelabshoff$ ls -al *lib*
-rw-r--r--@ 1 michaelabshoff staff 272776 Nov 26 22:28
cddlib-094b.p3.spkg
-rw-r--r--@ 1 michaelabshoff staff 1593104 Nov 26 22:28
eclib-20080310.p7.spkg
-rw-r--r--@ 1 michaelabshoff staff 293382 Nov 26 22:28
libfplll-2.1.6-20071129.p5.spkg
-rw-r--r--@ 1 michaelabshoff staff 970913 Nov 26 22:28
libgcrypt-1.4.0.p2.spkg
-rw-r--r--@ 1 michaelabshoff staff 383786 Nov 26 22:28
libgpg_error-1.6.p0.spkg
-rw-r--r--@ 1 michaelabshoff staff 713789 Nov 26 22:28
libm4ri-20080909.spkg
-rw-r--r--@ 1 michaelabshoff staff 626176 Nov 26 22:28
libpng-1.2.22.p8.spkg
-rw-r--r--@ 1 michaelabshoff staff 4832798 Nov 26 22:28
matplotlib-0.98.3.p3.spkg
-rw-r--r--@ 1 michaelabshoff staff 436207 Nov 26 22:28
zlib-1.2.3.p4.spkg
I plan to upgrade png in 3.2.2 and will also attempt to do the upgrade
to fplll 3.0.x. I guess if malb is ok with the rename we could also
change the name next time he releases an updated version.
I think we can eliminate libgpg_error and libgcrypt since gnutls these
days contains its own copy of those two libraries and builds them on
demand when it does not detect them externally. Having the in tree
versions is certainly a good thing since less can go wrong.
So if we do this we can do some cleanup and reducing the number of
spkgs is always a good thing IMHO. :)
Does anybody else have an opinion? If we do this I can open tickets
for the various tasks that need to be done.
> - Robert
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
