On Sat, 2015-09-19 at 21:22 +1000, Riley Baird wrote:
> > But do we need to be pedantic about upstream pdf files?
> >
> > Our petsc distribution would be in principle be improved if we were
> > to
> > include the pdf manuals.
>
> Yeah, I completely understand. Especially seeing as we now have
> t
On Sat, 2015-09-19 at 19:21 +0200, Graham Inggs wrote:
> Hi Drew
>
> On 19 September 2015 at 10:46, Drew Parsons
> wrote:
> > As far as the win32 exe goes, maintenance would be simpler if we
> > didn't
> > have to generate a separate dfsg-free upstream tarball just to
> > remove a
> > file that w
Hi Drew
On 19 September 2015 at 10:46, Drew Parsons wrote:
> As far as the win32 exe goes, maintenance would be simpler if we didn't
> have to generate a separate dfsg-free upstream tarball just to remove a
> file that we don't use.
Are you aware of UscanEnhancements[1]?
You can now use the 'Fi
Drew Parsons wrote:
> What is Debian policy on pdf documentation in upstream source?
>
>
> dolfin needs an updated petsc to run optimally (multiple processors).
> And dolfin is cool, so I'll update petsc (the latest version at
> http://www.mcs.anl.gov/petsc is 3.6.1).
>
> We've been using a df
> But do we need to be pedantic about upstream pdf files?
>
> Our petsc distribution would be in principle be improved if we were to
> include the pdf manuals.
Yeah, I completely understand. Especially seeing as we now have things
like libreoffice-pdfimport. But the FTP masters have specifically
What is Debian policy on pdf documentation in upstream source?
dolfin needs an updated petsc to run optimally (multiple processors).
And dolfin is cool, so I'll update petsc (the latest version at
http://www.mcs.anl.gov/petsc is 3.6.1).
We've been using a dfsg version of petsc. The dfsg impact
6 matches
Mail list logo
