Re: [sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

2010/3/14 Kasper Peeters : >> That review process is what killed the Debian sagemath package >> -- Upgrading during the review process >> sends you to the back of the queue, and by a year after my original >> submission, I had left MIT graduate school to start a startup, and I no >> longer had the

Re: [debian-sage] Re: [sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Tim Abbott wrote: > On Sun, 14 Mar 2010, Alex Ghitza wrote: > >> > However, they did say that given the circumstances, it might be possible >> > to push through a major update to the package to Karmic when once one is >> > available. >> > >> > So I think this leave

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

> That review process is what killed the Debian sagemath package > -- Upgrading during the review process > sends you to the back of the queue, and by a year after my original > submission, I had left MIT graduate school to start a startup, and I no > longer had the time to upgrade past a year of S

Re: [debian-sage] Re: [sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

Alex Ghitza wrote: Maybe we should just take whatever version of Sage is in Ubuntu right now and patch it so that running sage simply exits with something like ** THIS VERSION OF SAGE IS RIDICULOUSLY OUT-OF-DATE! Please downlo

Re: [debian-sage] Re: [sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On Mar 13, 2010, at 5:48 PM, Tim Abbott wrote: On Sun, 14 Mar 2010, Alex Ghitza wrote: However, they did say that given the circumstances, it might be possible to push through a major update to the package to Karmic when once one is available. So I think this leaves us at "we need to upda

Re: [debian-sage] Re: [sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On Sun, 14 Mar 2010, Alex Ghitza wrote: > > However, they did say that given the circumstances, it might be possible > > to push through a major update to the package to Karmic when once one is > > available. > > > > So I think this leaves us at "we need to update the package". Sigh. > > Mayb

Re: [debian-sage] Re: [sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

Hi Tim, Thanks for looking into this! On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 20:02:18 -0500 (EST), Tim Abbott wrote: > The answer I got on this is that there is no procedure for removing a > package from a stable release -- Ubuntu doesn't do that kind of thing. That's pretty hilarious. > However, they did say

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

I suggested somewhere that such a package should just download a binary installation of sage. Even Debian has packages of this type. Dmitrii On Mar 14, 9:02 am, Tim Abbott wrote: > On Fri, 12 Mar 2010, Tim Abbott wrote: > > As I mentioned on the bug report opened today at > >

Re: [debian-sage] Re: [sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On Fri, 12 Mar 2010, Tim Abbott wrote: > As I mentioned on the bug report opened today at > , I'm talking to > a member of the Ubuntu stable release update team who I know to see what > the procedure would be for getting the package remov

Re: [debian-sage] Re: [sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, William Stein wrote: > > We might make a PPA for Ubuntu.  If someone is interested in an easy way to > > install Sage via dpkg, that might be the best option at this point. > > > > I agree that removing sage 3.0.5 (or whatever version it is) from Debian is > > probably best, si

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On Debian stable, it's only possible to have python 2.6 out-of-tree (i.e. in /usr/local, built from scratch, possibly with more stuff needed to be built out-of-tree) So from Debian point of view this means that such a package is only feasible in the testing distro, where it's possible to have pyth

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On Mar 6, 9:53 pm, Ben Goodrich wrote: > ... but I agree > that it is not good to have a broken sagemath in the Debian repository > without a realistic possibility of being able to package a newer > version. Small follow up to this thread: https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sagemath/+qu

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

Harald, you can have a look at http://packages.debian.org/lenny/ttf-mscorefonts-installer for a similar functionality in a debian package. Dima On Mar 8, 2:09 am, Harald Schilly wrote: > On Mar 7, 9:28 am, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > > +1. > > This might actually be the way to go, more or less -

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On Mar 7, 9:28 am, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > +1. > This might actually be the way to go, more or less --- make sage > debian package a downloader. I've coded that some time ago, using aria2c for efficient downloading. It's quite simple. I just wasn't able to pack this together into a .deb file be

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

+1. This might actually be the way to go, more or less --- make sage debian package a downloader. Debian actually has such packages, e.g., something that downloads free fonts for OO... Dima On Mar 7, 3:47 pm, "ma...@mendelu.cz" wrote: > On 7 bře, 01:05, William Stein wrote: > > > > > It's not c

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On 7 bře, 01:05, William Stein wrote: > > It's not clear if it is PITA or not.  As far as I can tell, nobody > lifted a finger to work on the Debian/Ubuntu packaging of Sage during > the last 6 months (or more).  Nobody is working on it. > Just some ideas. I wonder if the following is possible R

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On Mar 6, 2010, at 3:51 PM, memilanuk wrote: Hello, Another vote here for getting an old and/or broken version *out* of Debian unstable/experimental. Seems kind of ridiculous to have a version that old in what is commonly viewed as the 'cutting edge' branch. Just tossing out ideas here... if

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 3:51 PM, memilanuk wrote: > Hello, > > Another vote here for getting an old and/or broken version *out* of > Debian unstable/experimental.  Seems kind of ridiculous to have a > version that old in what is commonly viewed as the 'cutting edge' > branch. > > Just tossing out i

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

Hello, Another vote here for getting an old and/or broken version *out* of Debian unstable/experimental. Seems kind of ridiculous to have a version that old in what is commonly viewed as the 'cutting edge' branch. Just tossing out ideas here... if its too much of a PITA to keep sage meshed with

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On Mar 6, 3:37 pm, "ma...@mendelu.cz" wrote: > I think, it does not have too much sense to have Debian package. It > would be better to put compiled Debian binaries to sagemath.org > download page. > > Cheers, > > Robert Marik I agree that compiling sage is not too difficult, and I actually use o

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On 4 bře, 18:03, Florent Hivert wrote: >       Hi there, > > Disclaimer: I'm not a debian user and my intend is not to launch a flame nor > to disregard the hard work that has been done to have a sage debian package. > Hi all, I have three machines on Debian (notebook, PC, server). Compilation

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On Mar 6, 9:59 am, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > well, this is trickier than you think. > E.g. Python 2.6 has not made it into Debian stable yet. > And installing Python 2.6 on Debian stable using the standard Debian > source package > installation mechanisms does not work. > Python is needed for functi

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On Mar 6, 7:27 am, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote: > Kasper Peeters wrote: > > Has anyone considered emailing the official maintainer > > >   Tim Abbott > > > and ask him whether he would be interested in handing over > > maintainership to someone with more time to bring the debian package > > up to

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

> The maintainers logic is clear they don't want to duplicate stuff. I can > appreciate that. I suggest we approach them, saying we understand this, and > that > in general it would be silly to include everything. If we then produce a long > list of packages which have needed to be patched, then i

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

I've heard that sage 3.4 was going to be something of an LTS, a "stable" release. If so, it would be brilliant to include this one with ubuntu, and then not produce another ubuntu package before the next LTS. The custom with such repositories, even more so with debian, is certainly not to get the l

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On Mar 5, 11:27 pm, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote: > I suspect the Debian people are reasonable and could be persuaded to accept > things if there were aware of just how many patches have needed to be made to > 'standard' packages. They are reasonable. My guess is they would usually email upstream to

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:46 AM, Minh Nguyen wrote: > I'm very much inexperienced with respect to Debian porting. > All I'm saying is that the task ahead seems to me too surmountable, That should be "too insurmountable". Sorry for the typo. -- Regards Minh Van Nguyen -- To post to this group,

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

Kasper Peeters wrote: Has anyone considered emailing the official maintainer Tim Abbott and ask him whether he would be interested in handing over maintainership to someone with more time to bring the debian package up to date? I would be happy to help out with this (including contacting Ab

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On Mar 5, 7:27 pm, Kasper Peeters wrote: > I would be happy to help out with this ... I just want to add that there is a package for mandriva. Look here at the list of required packages: http://fr2.rpmfind.net/linux/RPM/mandriva/devel/2010.1/i586/media/contrib/release/sagemath-4.3.3-2mdv2010.1.i5

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On Mar 5, 8:35 pm, François Bissey wrote: > > Earlier there was some discussion of creating an environmental > > variable that would attempt to build sage with system versions of the > > libraries and other dependencies, rather than the versions shipped > > with sage. Did anything come of that? >

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

> In the past, Tim Abbott asked to be cc'ed on threads like these. I > think his primary difficulty is keeping up with all the dependencies > of sage, especially when sage releases with a patched version of a > dependency that has not made it upstream yet. Debian package > maintainers are unlikely

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

In the past, Tim Abbott asked to be cc'ed on threads like these. I think his primary difficulty is keeping up with all the dependencies of sage, especially when sage releases with a patched version of a dependency that has not made it upstream yet. Debian package maintainers are unlikely to quickly

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

Hi Kasper, On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:27 AM, Kasper Peeters wrote: > I would be happy to help out with this (including contacting Abbott), > but it will clearly require quite a bit of work because neither Debian > nor Ubuntu like packages which duplicate software already in the > repositories.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On Mar 5, 2010, at 10:27 AM, Kasper Peeters wrote: Has anyone considered emailing the official maintainer Tim Abbott and ask him whether he would be interested in handing over maintainership to someone with more time to bring the debian package up to date? I would be happy to help out with

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

Has anyone considered emailing the official maintainer Tim Abbott and ask him whether he would be interested in handing over maintainership to someone with more time to bring the debian package up to date? I would be happy to help out with this (including contacting Abbott), but it will clear

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On 5 Mar, 15:27, William Stein wrote: > On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > here is the response from one of Debian folks > > Bill says: > > >> >>http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support/t/1f055a381532b667#354256... > > > This email mentions problem with Ubuntu. Removin

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

I've asked someone who is an active Debian developer about the removal thing, how it is done... Dmitrii On Mar 5, 11:05 am, William Stein wrote: > On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Jason Grout > wrote: > > On 03/04/2010 11:14 AM, Burcin Erocal wrote: > > >> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 18:03:47 +0100 > >>

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Jason Grout wrote: > On 03/04/2010 11:14 AM, Burcin Erocal wrote: >> >> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 18:03:47 +0100 >> Florent Hivert  wrote: >> >>>       Hi there, >>> >>> Disclaimer: I'm not a debian user and my intend is not to launch a >>> flame nor to disregard the hard

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

On 03/04/2010 11:14 AM, Burcin Erocal wrote: On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 18:03:47 +0100 Florent Hivert wrote: Hi there, Disclaimer: I'm not a debian user and my intend is not to launch a flame nor to disregard the hard work that has been done to have a sage debian package. However, during sage

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package build failure for gfan with 3.0.1alpha1

On May 3, 6:41 am, tabbott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On May 2, 7:31 pm, Francois <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I got it! -IGMPRATIONAL should be -DGMPRATIONAL > > Do not know where that came from in your package. > > > Francois > > Indeed; that was a typo in my package introduced when I fi

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package build failure for gfan with 3.0.1alpha1

On May 2, 7:31 pm, Francois <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I got it! -IGMPRATIONAL should be -DGMPRATIONAL > Do not know where that came from in your package. > > Francois Indeed; that was a typo in my package introduced when I fixed a different bug. It would have probably taken me a long time to

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package build failure for gfan with 3.0.1alpha1

On May 3, 4:25 am, "Michael Abshoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 6:16 PM, Timothy G Abbott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I attempted to build the 3.0.1alpha1 packages for Debian, but it doesn't > > build, apparently due to some type errors. The build log is attached -

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package build failure for gfan with 3.0.1alpha1

On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 6:16 PM, Timothy G Abbott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I attempted to build the 3.0.1alpha1 packages for Debian, but it doesn't > build, apparently due to some type errors. The build log is attached -- > I'd appreciate any guesses as to what's going on here. > >-Tim

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package.

Mark (Address may be forged. Please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > William, > > If sage is truly pushing Pyrex's limits, then it is likely that with > some gentle proding the pyrex author (Ewing?) should responsive to > needs ... since sage will be a great test case for pyrex. > I think t

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package.

Well, I'm in to help get a version of sage together on gentoo. Regards, Mark --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package.

William, If sage is truly pushing Pyrex's limits, then it is likely that with some gentle proding the pyrex author (Ewing?) should responsive to needs ... since sage will be a great test case for pyrex. Regards, Mark --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group,

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package.

On Oct 20, 2006, at 10:39 , Pere Urbón-Bayes wrote: > > kaimmello wrote: [snip] >> - by having more than one version of the same component, for example >> one stand-alone and one included in SAGE, we risk to betray the >> spirit >> of the free software, i.e. to use the available pieces of soft

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package.

On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 10:39:16 -0700, Pere Urbón-Bayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm agree with the 90% of your comments, but the last one will be > strange. The main problems is related with debian policy's that gave > packages a better quality with QA phase, etc .. and this give them with > s

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package.

> This might work for Maxima, GAP, etc. but it will be difficult for libraries > like Python where SAGE is an pretty early adopter -- but Debian can handle to > install both Python2.4 and Python2.5 -- and almost impossible for Pyrex where > SAGE's version already is some kind of fork as our pa

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package.

kaimmello wrote: >> I think Martin is not suggesting to use the official Debian packages but >> to provide our own repository, >> which means we would (eventually) maintain our own deb versions of GAP, >> Maxima, etc. This >> is a great long term goal, IMHO. >> > > IMHO it's quite dangerous to pr

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package.

James McCaw wrote: > On Thu, 2006-10-19 at 14:49 +0200, Pere Urbón Bayes wrote: > My feeling at the moment is that we are quite some way from needing a > debian sponsor! Just getting a sensibly integrated package (which uses > what is available in debian at the moment) will require significant wo

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package.

David Joyner wrote: Hello!! Im back, sorry but i was too busy. > A warning: > > 1. The gap debian package is delayed by 6 months or so and splits things > up in a > way that many SAGE wrappers for GAP functions will probably break. For > example, > debian distributes no GAP packages, not even

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package.

Hi all - obviously I'm outside SAGE development, but I'm a long term debian person (although not as a developer) and I'm motivated to work with others to get SAGE packaged for debian. If SAGE were ever to be integrated into debian proper, it would need to link in with already existing packages and

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package.

On Thursday 19 October 2006 18:04, kaimmello wrote: > > I think Martin is not suggesting to use the official Debian packages but > > to provide our own repository, > > which means we would (eventually) maintain our own deb versions of GAP, > > Maxima, etc. This > > is a great long term goal, IMHO.

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package.

> > I think Martin is not suggesting to use the official Debian packages but > to provide our own repository, > which means we would (eventually) maintain our own deb versions of GAP, > Maxima, etc. This > is a great long term goal, IMHO. > IMHO it's quite dangerous to provide and maintain our ow

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package.

Martin Albrecht wrote: > On Thursday 19 October 2006 14:28, Pere Urbón Bayes wrote: > >> Any way im starting doing a debian package. >> > > Hi there, > > just my five cents: > * There was a thread on debian-science on this, see: > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-science/2006/1

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package.

On Thursday 19 October 2006 14:28, Pere Urbón Bayes wrote: > Any way im starting doing a debian package. Hi there, just my five cents: * There was a thread on debian-science on this, see: http://lists.debian.org/debian-science/2006/10/msg00020.html IIRC there was a discussio

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package.

Hi. This is James McCaw here. I'll use my gmail rather than university email account... Yes, I'm interested in taking this forward and working with others motivated to get sage packaged up. I'm a debian person myself (have been since 1996 or so) and have successfully built a sage debian package r

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package.

Any way im starting doing a debian package. Regards, David Joyner wrote: > Pere Urbón Bayes wrote: >> Hi! Is there any community effort to package sage into debian? Could we >> do it?. I think could be interesting to form a group of interested >> people that could work on it, what do you think

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package.

Ok! Im really interested into it!!. What do you think James and Bobby? Could we do it as a team? Are you interested yet?. I think could be nice to provide sage with a packaging team that could give people a deb, rpm and some other packages. Regards, David Joyner wrote: > Pere Urbón Bayes wrot

[sage-devel] Re: Debian package.

Pere Urbón Bayes wrote: > Hi! Is there any community effort to package sage into debian? Could we > do it?. I think could be interesting to form a group of interested > people that could work on it, what do you think? > As far as I know, no one is actually doing it right now. Both James McCa