On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 10:32:56 +0200, Johannes Ring wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Julien Cristau
>> wrote:
>> > If dolfin only works with the version of swig it was built against, that
>> > needs to be reflected in the packa
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 10:32:56 +0200, Johannes Ring wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Julien Cristau
> wrote:
> > If dolfin only works with the version of swig it was built against, that
> > needs to be reflected in the package dependencies.
>
> Okay, but I'm unsure how to do that. Cur
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Julien Cristau
wrote:
> If dolfin only works with the version of swig it was built against, that
> needs to be reflected in the package dependencies.
Okay, but I'm unsure how to do that. Currently I have "Build-Depends:
swig2.0" in the source package and "Depends:
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 14:19:21 +0200, Johannes Ring wrote:
> The simplest solution would be to rebuild UFC and DOLFIN whenever a
> new version of SWIG is added in Debian. That's why i requested a
> binNMU. Not sure if it would be possible to automate this in some way.
>
If dolfin only works wit
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Johan Hake wrote:
> On 06/14/2012 09:46 AM, Johannes Ring wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 10:38 PM, Anders Logg wrote:
>>> Does it work if you remove those checks in
>>>
>>> dolfin/site-packages/dolfin/compilemodules/compilemodule.py
>>> dolfin/site-packag
On 06/14/2012 09:46 AM, Johannes Ring wrote:
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 10:38 PM, Anders Logg wrote:
Does it work if you remove those checks in
dolfin/site-packages/dolfin/compilemodules/compilemodule.py
dolfin/site-packages/dolfin/compilemodules/jit.py
?
Yes, it works fine, but I also
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 10:38 PM, Anders Logg wrote:
> Does it work if you remove those checks in
>
> dolfin/site-packages/dolfin/compilemodules/compilemodule.py
> dolfin/site-packages/dolfin/compilemodules/jit.py
>
> ?
Yes, it works fine, but I also had to remove the check in
ufc_utils/bui
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 09:53:48PM +0200, Johannes Ring wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 9:15 PM, Anders Logg wrote:
> > Does this break because we check the SWIG version in the JIT compiler,
> > or because it actually breaks (with some link error)?
>
> It is the version check that makes it break.
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 9:15 PM, Anders Logg wrote:
> Does this break because we check the SWIG version in the JIT compiler,
> or because it actually breaks (with some link error)?
It is the version check that makes it break. This is the error message:
OSError: PyDOLFIN was not compiled with t
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 09:33:36AM +0200, Johannes Ring wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 08:43:54 +0200, Johannes Ring wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:05 AM, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> >> > Johannes Ring (31/05/2012):
> >> >> pytho
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 08:43:54 +0200, Johannes Ring wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:05 AM, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>> > Johannes Ring (31/05/2012):
>> >> python-ufc needs to be rebuilt against the latest swig (2.0.7). Please
>> >> bin
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 08:43:54 +0200, Johannes Ring wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:05 AM, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > Johannes Ring (31/05/2012):
> >> python-ufc needs to be rebuilt against the latest swig (2.0.7). Please
> >> binNMU it.
> >>
> >> nmu python-ufc_2.0.5-2 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 7:49 AM, Mathieu Malaterre
wrote:
> If I may, I believe this is due to: http://bugs.debian.org/674263
> Any binary build with swig 2.0.5 or 2.0.6 should be rebuild IMHO.
I agree, considering the regressions in SWIG 2.0.5 and 2.0.6, however,
the problem in #675207 is not rel
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:05 AM, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Johannes Ring (31/05/2012):
>> python-ufc needs to be rebuilt against the latest swig (2.0.7). Please
>> binNMU it.
>>
>> nmu python-ufc_2.0.5-2 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild against swig 2.0.7, see
>> #675207.'
>
> if this package has such strict
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:05 AM, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> (Adding the bug report to the loop.)
>
> Hello,
>
> Johannes Ring (31/05/2012):
>> python-ufc needs to be rebuilt against the latest swig (2.0.7). Please
>> binNMU it.
>>
>> nmu python-ufc_2.0.5-2 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild against swig 2.0.7, s
(Adding the bug report to the loop.)
Hello,
Johannes Ring (31/05/2012):
> python-ufc needs to be rebuilt against the latest swig (2.0.7). Please
> binNMU it.
>
> nmu python-ufc_2.0.5-2 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild against swig 2.0.7, see #675207.'
if this package has such strict dependencies on swig,
Hello,
python-ufc needs to be rebuilt against the latest swig (2.0.7). Please
binNMU it.
nmu python-ufc_2.0.5-2 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild against swig 2.0.7, see #675207.'
Thanks.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
17 matches
Mail list logo
