Package: fenics
Version: 1:2017.1.0.1
Severity: minor
Hi,
I tried to install the Suggested and Recommended packages, but found two are
non-existent.
python-scitools: appears to have existed at one time, but now removed from
Debian; see
https://packages.qa.debian.org/s/scitools/news/20160506T0
Package: python-sfepy
Version: 2016.2-2
Severity: normal
I tried to run the examples using:
sfepy-run simple examples/diffusion/poisson_short_syntax.py
and obtained:
sfepy: left over: ['verbose', '__builtins__', '__file__', '__doc__',
'__name__', 'data_dir', '__package__', '_filename']
s
On Tuesday, November 15, 2016 1:02:10 AM CST Santiago Vila wrote:
> Package: librospack-dev,libgtest-dev,src:ros-image-common
> Severity: serious
>
> Dear maintainer:
>
> I tried to build ros-image-common in stretch with "dpkg-buildpackage -A"
> (which is what the "Arch: all" autobuilder would do
On Monday, June 27, 2016 12:38:45 PM CDT Chris Lamb wrote:
> please clarify src/ipelib/ipebitmap.cpp
Can I request that you ask a more specific question, please?
Thanks,
-Steve
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
--
debian-science-maintainers mailing list
debian
Package: diet
Severity: normal
Boost 1.55 has not built correctly since the GCC 5 introduction in July 2015
and I plan
to ask for its removal from unstable very shortly. It has already been removed
from
testing.
The package diet appeared on a list of reverse dependencies generated
using 'dak
Package: limereg
Severity: normal
Boost 1.55 has not built correctly since the GCC 5 introduction in July 2015
and I plan
to ask for its removal from unstable very shortly. It has already been removed
from
testing.
The package limereg appeared on a list of reverse dependencies generated
using
Package: feel++
Severity: normal
Boost 1.55 has not built correctly since the GCC 5 introduction in July 2015
and I plan
to ask for its removal from unstable very shortly. It has already been removed
from
testing.
The package feel++ appeared on a list of reverse dependencies generated
using '
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 09:07:52AM +0100, Julien Puydt wrote:
> Package: gmp
> Version: 2:6.0.0+dfsg-6
>
> Hi,
>
> the sagemath software is using MPIR, but we're trying to package it for
> debian using the default lib for multi-precision arithmetic : GMP.
>
> Sagemath uses mp_set_memory_function
Well,
Thank you.
On April 21, 2014 04:56:21 PM Niels Möller wrote:
> Magnus Holmgren writes:
> > Oh well, I went ahead and did it for you. However, as you can see, some
> > symbols went missing in both 5.1 and 6.0.
>
> Are those the ones in the #MISSING: lines in your file? They are all
> undoc
On April 22, 2014 07:43:18 PM Benjamin Eltzner wrote:
> Ah, yes, sorry I forgot about that. The bug can be closed.
Done. For future reference: you can close the bug yourself simply by emailing
nnn-d...@bugs.debian.org.
Regards,
-Steve
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed mes
On April 20, 2014 06:59:31 PM Magnus Holmgren wrote:
> reassign 745233 libgmp10
> retitle 745233 libgmp10: Wrong shlibs information after 6.0.0 adds new
> symbols affects 745233 libhogweed2
> thanks
>
> söndagen den 20 april 2014 12.55.09 Ivo De Decker:
> > On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 01:14:18AM +0200
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 07:08:35PM +0200, Benjamin Eltzner wrote:
> I have no idea, whether this bug is in the package or in the upstream
> library. If it concerns upstream, I would be very glad if you forwarded
> it and set me to CC.
There is only one tiny patch to gmp in this version: to disabl
On April 6, 2014 12:12:29 PM Matthias Klose wrote:
> Control: reopen -1
> Control: severity -1 important
> Control: tags -1 + help
>
> you applied a work around, but didn't fix the issue. Please keep the issue
> open until it is addressed.
I fixed the build failure with a patch from upstream, so
On April 1, 2014 09:12:24 AM Anton Gladky wrote:
> 2014-03-31 10:58 GMT+02:00 Mathieu Malaterre :
> > Typical scenarios that should not happen is an app linked against
> > vtkCommon and vtkCommonCore. This gets even worst with python
> >
> > $ python
> > import vtkCommon
> > import vtkCommonCore
>
On April 1, 2014 08:59:13 AM you wrote:
> As explained in details libs have different SONAME (vtkCommon !=
> vtkCommonCore) however they provide the same symbols (up to the ABI
> diff). This is bad (tm) !
Sorry, what details are you referring to?
-Steve
signature.asc
Description: This is a dig
On March 31, 2014 10:58:28 AM Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> Package: libvtk6
>
> Clearly there is something missing here. libvtk6 can be co-installed
> with libvtk5.8. VTK API (ABI too) is completely incompatible in
> between those two versions.
Clearly I'm missing something, because it is routine t
ngelog
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 10:20 AM, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda > wrote:
> >
> > A Dimecres, 5 de març de 2014, Steve M. Robbins va escriure:
> > > On March 3, 2014 09:22:01 AM Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote:
> > > > > [1] https://svn.boo
17 matches
Mail list logo
