entioning
who made it or what OS it was originally developed for.
wt
--
Warren Turkal
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
.
As a counterexample, the afflib at [1] was specifically licensed under the
4-clause because the company developing thinks they deserve the credit for
developing it. It seems kind of arrogant when others most certainly have
contributed to the library's development.
[1]http://www.affl
octave directly. The same can be
applied to other used libs.
wt
--
Warren Turkal, Research Associate III/Systems Administrator
Colorado State University, Dept. of Atmospheric Science
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ficiently in order to give good compatibility with
> other existing Debian packages?
Work with the upstream to get the changes needed for SAGE integrated into libs
like octave. It seems like it will be a lot of work, but it is the only
proper way to do it.
wt
--
Warren Turkal, Research Associ
On Tuesday 01 May 2007 04:40, Bart Martens wrote:
> Yes, see "uversionmangle" in "man uscan".
Thanks, I'll check it out.
wt
--
Warren Turkal, Research Associate III/Systems Administrator
Colorado State University, Dept. of Atmospheric Science
--
To UNSUBSCRIB
uupdate
I would like it not to report 4.0-beta1 as a newer version, if possible. Does
anyone have any suggestions?
wt
--
Warren Turkal, Research Associate III/Systems Administrator
Colorado State University, Dept. of Atmospheric Science
one change and then
> I really will upload it.
Done.
wt
--
Warren Turkal
nges from pre8 other than the
changelog revision.
wt
--
Warren Turkal
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> During the build, there are a lot of error messages of the form
> "warning: enumeration value ‘NC_NAT’ not handled in switch". Is this
> something that could be a problem? Maybe upstream would best know the
> answer to this...
First of all, they are warnings. Upstream says the errors were also in 3.6.1
or before. They don't seem to cause any functional problems. I have
scientists using 3.6.2 compiled and installed into /usr/local as we speak.
wt
--
Warren Turkal (w00t)
into this package. Please check it
out.
The fun bonus is that I added netcdf-dbg. It is a package that includes all
the debugging symbols for all the packages built from this netcdf source
package.
[1]http://www.penguintechs.org/~wt/debian/netcdf/
wt
--
Warren Turkal, Research Associate III/Systems Administrator
Colorado State University, Dept. of Atmospheric Science
Kevin and other interested parties,
New netcdf packages are up at [1]. All issues are fixed other than the
netcdf-doc related issue.
[1]http://www.penguintechs.org/~wt/debian/netcdf/
wt
--
Warren Turkal, Research Associate III/Systems Administrator
Colorado State University, Dept. of
order to escape them from Make. My apologies for that!
Fixed in pre4 @ [1].
[1]http://www.penguintechs.org/~wt/debian/netcdf/
wt
--
Warren Turkal
t this is the same as the "netcdf-doc" referenced by #321337
It seems to be. However, netcdf-doc hasn't been updated in ages.
wt
--
Warren Turkal
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
an
> arch: all netcdf-doc package *and* can work out how to get CDBS to
> generate the docs only in the binary-indep target.)
researching
> One last thing: please install RELEASE_NOTES as the upstream changelog
> ("changelog.gz") in all the binary .debs.
done
Updated packages are available as version 3.6.2-1~pre3 from [1].
[1]http://www.penguintechs.org/~wt/debian/netcdf/
wt
--
Warren Turkal
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
have to
manually remove them if you use apt to install the new ones.
[1]http://www.penguintechs.org/~wt/debian/netcdf/
Thanks,
wt
--
Warren Turkal
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The NetCDF 3.6.2 library was just released today. I have created packages at
[1]. They are lintian clean and apt-gettable. Please review them. Considering
this is a stable NetCDF release, I am also looking for a sponsor.
[1]http://www.penguintechs.org/~wt/debian/netcdf/
Thanks,
wt
--
Warren
t; ... might that be a problem? If this is so, it could be necessary to
> re-libtoolize the source with Debian's libtool [1,2].
Even after re-libtoolizing, the version scheme above causes failures in the
build for me.
wt
--
Warren Turkal
convinced me, I will reroll the packages at version
3.6.2-beta6~pre1-1 so that the original source is uploaded as well. The
current version scheme I used doesn't allow a proper -1 release. Or do you
have a suggestion?
wt
--
Warren Turkal, Research Associate III/Systems Administrator
Colorado S
aining these packages outside of Debian until Etch. If you
think it would be useful to upload to experimental, what do I need to change?
I would assume that the changelog needs to say experimental instead of
unstable. Is there anything else?
wt
--
Warren Turkal, Research Associate III/Systems
On Thursday 01 February 2007 13:04, George Danchev wrote:
> It looks like you forgot to put netcdf_3.6.2-beta6.orig.tar.gz over
> there.
It's there now.
wt
--
Warren Turkal, Research Associate III/Systems Administrator
Colorado State University, Dept. of Atmospheric Scien
The new packages are at [1].
The newest packages remove the libnetcdf++4 package as I don't think it's
needed.
Please check out these packages, and help me get them ready for upload to
debian.
[1]http://penguintechs.org/~wt/debian/netcdf/
Thanks,
wt
--
Warren Turkal, Research Ass
On Wednesday 31 January 2007 22:49, Warren Turkal wrote:
> Clearly, my signature is messed up somehow. Here's another shot.
Gpg verifies the signature on the file itself. I think my mail client is
wrapping lines and causing the sig to fail. One more try:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE--
On Wednesday 31 January 2007 16:31, Warren Turkal wrote:
> Here's a new netcdf package updated to the beta6. It has brand new sonames.
> Please check it out.
Clearly, my signature is messed up somehow. Here's another shot.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1
cture: source i386
Version: 3.6.2-beta6-1~pre1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Warren Turkal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Changed-By: Warren Turkal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Description:
libnetcdf++4 - Dummy upgrade package for libnetcdf3
libnetcdf-dev - Development kit for NetCDF
netcdf upstream:
Jeff Whitaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Warren Turkal wrote:
>> The cfortran.h file is in /usr/include on Debian systems after
>> installing the cfortran package. Does netcdf use a cfortran.h in
>> /usr/include instead of the one within the tarball wh
On Friday 15 December 2006 17:22, Warren Turkal wrote:
> Known issues:
> * haven't bumped soname for C++ yet. I want to see if upstream will do
> that.
Ed from upstream had a question:
***
I'm not too strong yet on how these numbers are used, but last time I
looked into it
On Friday 15 December 2006 16:40, Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
> Warren Turkal wrote:
> > On Thursday 14 December 2006 11:09, Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
> >> 1) Why did you make the libnetcdf++3 package into a dummy package and
> >> move the C++ bindings into the libnetcdf3 pac
.
I already looked into that issue. Three packages seemed to build depend on the
netcdf libs and g77. Of those 3, none appeared to use netcdf apis in the
fortran code in the packages.
wt
--
Warren Turkal, Research Associate III/Systems Administrator
Colorado State University, Dept. of Atmospheric Science
YMMV.
I have attached the new control file. Can you please check it out?
wt
[1]http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-files.html#s-libraries
--
Warren Turkal
Source: netcdf
Section: science
Priority: optional
Maintainer: Warren Turkal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Build-Depends: cdbs, debhelper (>= 5)
is hard to maintain a
> stable ABI in.) Actually, I seem to remember you saying that shared lib
> support was hacked into the Debian packages, meaning you will need to
> care for the soname yourself.
The sonames in the old version were an illusion. Should we diverge from
upstream on the soname?
wt
--
Warren Turkal
On Wednesday 13 December 2006 10:55, Warren Turkal wrote:
> I think that we should just go for it. W00T!
KST can actually plot netcdf graphs after the upgrade in library. It just
crashed on all my netcdf files before. This is another reason to upgrade the
library.
Unfortunately, it lookes l
On Tuesday 12 December 2006 18:41, Warren Turkal wrote:
> Uploaded to [1].
Another new package release @ [1]. This is the first set that is totally
lintian clean.
Changes:
netcdf (3.6.2-beta4-1~pre3) unstable; urgency=low
.
* added symlinks for libraries in /usr/lib
* changed confli
earch indicate that there will
be no fallout with packages in the main archive with regard to compiling
the netcdf lib with gfortran.
I think that we should just go for it. W00T!
Comments?
wt
--
Warren Turkal, Research Associate III/Systems Administrator
Colorado State University, Dept. of Atmospheric Science
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
h.ex post 1~pre2.
2) I have already deleted netcdf.doc-base.EX post 1~pre2.
wt
[1]http://penguintechs.org/~wt/debian/netcdf/
--
Warren Turkal, Research Associate III/Systems Administrator
Colorado State University, Dept. of Atmospheric Science
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
have had to compile it locally for a while
(for F90 support) and used that experience for developing the package. So,
should the prior package author attribution be included or not? I would like
to address this issue ASAP.
wt
--
Warren Turkal, Research Associate III/Systems Administrator
Color
On Monday 11 December 2006 15:53, Warren Turkal wrote:
> New version (3.6.2-beta4~pre1) at [1]. This version sorts before the last
> one so you will have to manually remove the prior packages I posted if you
> used apt* to install them.
>
> Here's the changelog entry.
>
>
On Monday 11 December 2006 15:33, Warren Turkal wrote:
> It is running through debuild-pbuilder right now.
New version (3.6.2-beta4~pre1) at [1]. This version sorts before the last one
so you will have to manually remove the prior packages I posted if you used
apt* to install them.
Here&#x
On Monday 11 December 2006 14:33, Florent Rougon wrote:
> Warren Turkal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Okay, the build deps now look like:
> > Build-Depends: cdbs, debhelper (>= 5), autotools-dev, gfortran, tex,
> > texi2dvi
>
> Ugh, what's this '
On Monday 11 December 2006 12:35, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> You can use the ~ suffix, as in 3.6.2-beta4~pre1. These versions will
> evaluate lower than 3.6.2-beta4.
Thanks for the info. I am guessing that I would version it like
3.6.2-beta4~pre1-1 then?
wt
--
Warren Turkal, Research Ass
he pre
packages into one changelog entry for the -1 release.
wt
--
Warren Turkal, Research Associate III/Systems Administrator
Colorado State University, Dept. of Atmospheric Science
ry for the next release. Here the text I
added to the top of the copyright file.
"This package was put together by Warren Turkal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with
sources obtained from the http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/software/netcdf/
site."
> * You "should name the or
]http://www.penguintechs.org/~wt/debian/netcdf/
[2]http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=321336
--
Warren Turkal
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How is the /etc/ld.so.conf file managed in Debian? For locally compiled
packages, it is somewhat of a pain to have to add /usr/local/lib/ to the
/etc/ld.so.conf. I would like to file a wishlist bug for the /usr/local/lib/
to be added to ld.so.conf by default. Only problem is I don't know how it
How is the /etc/ld.so.conf file managed in Debian? For locally compiled
packages, it is somewhat of a pain to have to add /usr/local/lib/ to the
/etc/ld.so.conf. I would like to file a wishlist bug for the /usr/local/lib/
to be added to ld.so.conf by default. Only problem is I don't know how it
Is anyone maintaining blender? I mailed the maintainer and never got a
response.
Warren
--
Treasurer, GOLUM, Inc.
http://www.golum.org
Is anyone maintaining blender? I mailed the maintainer and never got a
response.
Warren
--
Treasurer, GOLUM, Inc.
http://www.golum.org
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How do I detect an ISO C99 environment via C preproccessor directives?
Warren
--
Treasurer, GOLUM, Inc.
http://www.golum.org
How do I detect an ISO C99 environment via C preproccessor directives?
Warren
--
Treasurer, GOLUM, Inc.
http://www.golum.org
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This won't work cleanly. Consider versioned kernel symbols.
On Friday 13 September 2002 12:00 pm, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> Well, but the modules in question builds well with the kernel-header
> (they just need some of the .h it seems).
--
Treasurer, GOLUM, Inc.
http://www.golum.org
alsa-source does not patch the kernel. It builds only addition kernel modules.
On Friday 13 September 2002 11:57 am, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> Mmm, yes, but there is a difference, the above stuff is available as a
> kernel patch or something, while the unicorn driver comes in a
> standalone tarball, an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Craig, could you please describe more fully what you want to do? Are
you trying to take a precompiled program (like distributed-net) and
package it for use or are you compiling the program and only want
binary packages available?
- --
Warren
GPG F
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Craig, could you please describe more fully what you want to do? Are
you trying to take a precompiled program (like distributed-net) and
package it for use or are you compiling the program and only want
binary packages available?
- --
Warren
GPG
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Maybe the name conffile is inappropriate for the files managed as
conffiles in dpkg. Maybe they should be called maintained-conffiles or
something to that effect.
On Friday 15 February 2002 08:59 am, Josip Rodin wrote:
> Whether or not it was conffi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Maybe the name conffile is inappropriate for the files managed as
conffiles in dpkg. Maybe they should be called maintained-conffiles or
something to that effect.
On Friday 15 February 2002 08:59 am, Josip Rodin wrote:
> Whether or not it was conff
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Okay. Is there any docs with the prog?
Warren
On Thursday 08 November 2001 06:01 pm, Nicolas Boullis wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2001 at 05:31:15PM -0600, Warren Turkal wrote:
> > Is there any kind of documentation that comes with it. If the
&g
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Okay. Is there any docs with the prog?
Warren
On Thursday 08 November 2001 06:01 pm, Nicolas Boullis wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2001 at 05:31:15PM -0600, Warren Turkal wrote:
> > Is there any kind of documentation that comes with i
ver (www.cbu.edu) that
> their router is broken. It rejects ECN enabled.
>
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2001 at 12:52:18PM -0600, Warren Turkal wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Could someone please take a look at my package for uml at:
&g
ver (www.cbu.edu) that
> their router is broken. It rejects ECN enabled.
>
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2001 at 12:52:18PM -0600, Warren Turkal wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Could someone please take a look at my package for uml at:
&g
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Did anyone ever take a look at my package?
The files are at http://www.cbu.edu/~wturkal/debian/.
They are not apt gettable at the moment.
Warren
- --
GPG Fingerprint: 30C8 BDF1 B133 14CB 832F 2C5D 99A1 A19F 559D 9E88
GPG Public Key @ http://www.cbu.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Did anyone ever take a look at my package?
The files are at http://www.cbu.edu/~wturkal/debian/.
They are not apt gettable at the moment.
Warren
- --
GPG Fingerprint: 30C8 BDF1 B133 14CB 832F 2C5D 99A1 A19F 559D 9E88
GPG Public Key @ http://www.cbu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Could someone please take a look at my package for uml at:
http://www.cbu.edu/~wturkal/debian/
Warren
- --
GPG Fingerprint: 30C8 BDF1 B133 14CB 832F 2C5D 99A1 A19F 559D 9E88
GPG Public Key @ http://www.cbu.edu/~wturkal/wturkal.gpg
-BEGIN PGP SIG
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Could someone please take a look at my package for uml at:
http://www.cbu.edu/~wturkal/debian/
Warren
- --
GPG Fingerprint: 30C8 BDF1 B133 14CB 832F 2C5D 99A1 A19F 559D 9E88
GPG Public Key @ http://www.cbu.edu/~wturkal/wturkal.gpg
-BEGIN PGP SI
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Try asking the upstream to split the install from the setup
instructions or to add a key phrase where they switch. Then you could
use perl or sed or something to do it automagically.
Warren
On Saturday 20 October 2001 10:27 am, Tollef Fog Heen wrot
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Try asking the upstream to split the install from the setup
instructions or to add a key phrase where they switch. Then you could
use perl or sed or something to do it automagically.
Warren
On Saturday 20 October 2001 10:27 am, Tollef Fog Heen wro
Why not just create a symlink to a device node /dev/flipit and just
link it to the right file.
Warren
On Tue, Oct 16, 2001 at 10:46:52PM -0600, Matt Armstrong wrote:
> I'm packaging my own program (http://www.lickey.com/flipit/) and have a
> question about configuration files.
>
> Section 11.7.3
Why not just create a symlink to a device node /dev/flipit and just
link it to the right file.
Warren
On Tue, Oct 16, 2001 at 10:46:52PM -0600, Matt Armstrong wrote:
> I'm packaging my own program (http://www.lickey.com/flipit/) and have a
> question about configuration files.
>
> Section 11.7.3
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Where do I find some info on setting up an unofficial apt source?
Warren
- --
GPG Fingerprint: 30C8 BDF1 B133 14CB 832F 2C5D 99A1 A19F 559D 9E88
GPG Public Key @ http://www.cbu.edu/~wturkal/wturkal.gpg
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Where do I find some info on setting up an unofficial apt source?
Warren
- --
GPG Fingerprint: 30C8 BDF1 B133 14CB 832F 2C5D 99A1 A19F 559D 9E88
GPG Public Key @ http://www.cbu.edu/~wturkal/wturkal.gpg
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
What about those of us in Memphis, TN?
Warren
On Tuesday 25 September 2001 22:29, Richard Hecker wrote:
> David Caldwell wrote:
> ..
>
> - Do I really need my key signed by someone, or is a signed ID card
> ok?
>
> > If I need to meet someone in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
What about those of us in Memphis, TN?
Warren
On Tuesday 25 September 2001 22:29, Richard Hecker wrote:
> David Caldwell wrote:
> ..
>
> - Do I really need my key signed by someone, or is a signed ID card
> ok?
>
> > If I need to meet someone i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday 23 September 2001 16:25, NORMAND Jacques wrote:
> for transcode, the installation process use ./configure script. Hence
> dh_make tells me that I most certainly don't have to modify it. Can I
> trust it ???
run debuild and see if it install
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday 23 September 2001 16:25, NORMAND Jacques wrote:
> for transcode, the installation process use ./configure script. Hence
> dh_make tells me that I most certainly don't have to modify it. Can I
> trust it ???
run debuild and see if it install
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Did you us dh_make to start the construction of your package?
Warren
On Saturday 22 September 2001 10:53, Ralf Treinen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> you posted to the debian developers list. Please send questions of
> this kind to debian-mentors@lists.debian.org w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Did you us dh_make to start the construction of your package?
Warren
On Saturday 22 September 2001 10:53, Ralf Treinen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> you posted to the debian developers list. Please send questions of
> this kind to [EMAIL PROTECTED] where beginner
74 matches
Mail list logo
