John Darrington skribis:
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 10:11:14AM +0100, Ludovic Court??s wrote:
>
> > Ok. Andraes' and Ludo's explanations convince me. However I'm
> skeptical that
> > the Octave devs would be quite so convinced. And removing the
> propagates-inputs
> > will mean
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 10:11:14AM +0100, Ludovic Court??s wrote:
> Ok. Andraes' and Ludo's explanations convince me. However I'm
skeptical that
> the Octave devs would be quite so convinced. And removing the
propagates-inputs
> will mean patching to the Octave source and I don
John Darrington skribis:
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 08:30:02PM +0100, Ludovic Court??s wrote:
> Andreas Enge skribis:
>
> > On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 08:38:16AM +0100, John Darrington wrote:
> >> So it would not reduce the total number of "inputs". Further, it
> would mean we
On 01/26/2014 08:30 PM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> To summarize: ‘propagated-inputs’ should list libraries 99% of the
> time. Listing programs in ‘propagated-inputs’ just for the sake of
> populating $PATH is a bad idea.
I recently found that many library packages do not propagate libc. I
install
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 08:30:02PM +0100, Ludovic Court??s wrote:
Andreas Enge skribis:
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 08:38:16AM +0100, John Darrington wrote:
>> So it would not reduce the total number of "inputs". Further, it would
mean we would have
>> to devise a number
Andreas Enge skribis:
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 08:38:16AM +0100, John Darrington wrote:
>> So it would not reduce the total number of "inputs". Further, it would mean
>> we would have
>> to devise a number of potentially complicated patches, which we would be
>> condemned to
>> maintain. Fur
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 08:38:16AM +0100, John Darrington wrote:
> So it would not reduce the total number of "inputs". Further, it would mean
> we would have
> to devise a number of potentially complicated patches, which we would be
> condemned to
> maintain. Further, it seems to me, to be a b
On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 09:41:32PM +0100, Ludovic Court??s wrote:
John Darrington skribis:
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 05:42:17PM +0100, Andreas Enge wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 05:14:57PM +0100, John Darrington wrote:
> > The octave build system is rather na
John Darrington skribis:
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 05:42:17PM +0100, Andreas Enge wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 05:14:57PM +0100, John Darrington wrote:
> > The octave build system is rather naive. These propagated inputs
> don't actually
> > *need* to be present at configure/
On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 05:42:17PM +0100, Andreas Enge wrote:
On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 05:14:57PM +0100, John Darrington wrote:
> The octave build system is rather naive. These propagated inputs don't
actually
> *need* to be present at configure/build time. But the ./configure
(ra
On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 05:14:57PM +0100, John Darrington wrote:
> The octave build system is rather naive. These propagated inputs don't
> actually
> *need* to be present at configure/build time. But the ./configure (rather
> stupidly IMO)
> checks for their presence, and turns off the relevan
On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 04:30:30PM +0100, Ludovic Court??s wrote:
> +(native-inputs
> + `(("gfortran" ,gfortran-4.8)
> + ("perl" ,perl)
> + ("less" ,less)
> + ("pkg-config" ,pkg-config)
> + ("texinfo" ,texinfo)
> + ("ghostscr
John Darrington skribis:
> * gnu/packages/maths.scm (octave gnuplot): New variables
Should be “(octave, gnuplot)”.
> +(define-public gnuplot
> + (package
> +(name "gnuplot")
> +(version "4.6.3")
> +(source
> + (origin
> + (method url-fetch)
> + (uri (string-append "mi
* gnu/packages/maths.scm (octave gnuplot): New variables
---
gnu/packages/maths.scm | 88
1 file changed, 88 insertions(+)
diff --git a/gnu/packages/maths.scm b/gnu/packages/maths.scm
index 640d502..ffa2cd9 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/maths.scm
+++
14 matches
Mail list logo
