Le samedi 3 décembre 2016 13:55:30 UTC+1, Jeroen Demeyer a écrit :
>
> On 2016-07-03 21:08, Han Frederic wrote:
> > Yes these binaries were left in upstream 1.2.2-37 source tarball, but it
> > is a mistake.
>
> How do you create those binaries? It should be done by a script ("make
> dist" if
On 2016-07-03 21:08, Han Frederic wrote:
Yes these binaries were left in upstream 1.2.2-37 source tarball, but it
is a mistake.
How do you create those binaries? It should be done by a script ("make
dist" if you use autotools), not by hand.
--
You received this message because you are subscr
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 10:59:48PM -0800, Ralf Stephan wrote:
> Apologies. I had the impression that repackaging is frowned upon for
> security reasons. However, just removing files can be automated, either by
> the original author or the Sage release manager, so there is room for
> improve
Apologies. I had the impression that repackaging is frowned upon for
security reasons. However, just removing files can be automated, either by
the original author or the Sage release manager, so there is room for
improvement.
So, for making giac standard package, we are practically waiting for
Hi ralf,
I am also lost because what you ask in this trac is what is done by the
build/pkg/giac/spkg-src
{{{
VERSION="1.2.2"
VERSIONREV="103"
# The upstream tarball name is: giac"$SOURCEORIG".tar.gz
SOURCEORIG=_"$VERSION"-"$VERSIONREV"
...
# Downloading upstream source
sage-download-file
"http
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 07:54:29AM -0800, Ralf Stephan wrote:
> I opened https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/22011
> to prepare the giac package to use the official tarballs.
What is the logical relation between "make giac a standard Sage package"
and "use the upstream unmodified tarball" ?
Whi
I opened https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/22011
to prepare the giac package to use the official tarballs.
Regards,
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to
On Friday, December 2, 2016 at 1:49:57 PM UTC+1, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
> I was talking about silently changing a tarfile, without changing its name
> at all.
>
That could happen with any package where the tarball is not on a typical
repo server.
Is there a way for the release manager to check
On Friday, December 2, 2016 at 10:06:34 AM UTC, Ralf Stephan wrote:
>
> On Friday, December 2, 2016 at 10:51:47 AM UTC+1, Han Frederic wrote:
>>
>> We had this argument already. If you prefer to keep it this way, please
provide us a VCS (git preferred) repo
off which we can label rele
Le vendredi 2 décembre 2016 11:06:34 UTC+1, Ralf Stephan a écrit :
>
> On Friday, December 2, 2016 at 10:51:47 AM UTC+1, Han Frederic wrote:
>>
>> We had this argument already. If you prefer to keep it this way, please
provide us a VCS (git preferred) repo
off which we can label relea
On Friday, December 2, 2016 at 10:51:47 AM UTC+1, Han Frederic wrote:
>
> We had this argument already. If you prefer to keep it this way, please
>>> provide us a VCS (git preferred) repo
>>> off which we can label releases by the latest commit in the master
>>> branch, or something like this.
>
Le vendredi 2 décembre 2016 08:37:20 UTC+1, Ralf Stephan a écrit :
>
> On Tuesday, July 5, 2016 at 9:31:04 AM UTC+2, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>>
>> Yes that tarball has the goods. I’ll wait for a new 1.2.2-xx tarball
>>> though. No self respecting
>>> packager wants to deal with an upstream tarbal
On Tuesday, July 5, 2016 at 9:31:04 AM UTC+2, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
> Yes that tarball has the goods. I’ll wait for a new 1.2.2-xx tarball
>> though. No self respecting
>> packager wants to deal with an upstream tarball which changes all the
>> times.
>
>
> We had this argument already. If
On 06/07/16 04:16, leif wrote:
If so, should we change also the spkg name? (may be we should not, so
> people will really upgrade?)
That's not a problem, since Sage releases and specific spkg versions are
now stupidly tied together (even for optional spkgs).
Upgrade has to be handled carefully
Bernard sent me earlier:
https://dev.geogebra.org/trac/browser/trunk/geogebra/giac/src/giac
On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 9:31 AM Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
>
> On Tuesday, July 5, 2016 at 7:48:51 AM UTC+1, François wrote:
>
>>
>> > On 5/07/2016, at 17:13, parisse wrote:
>> >
>> > disable-gui should be w
On Tuesday, July 5, 2016 at 7:48:51 AM UTC+1, François wrote:
>
>
> > On 5/07/2016, at 17:13, parisse > wrote:
> >
> > disable-gui should be working. If not, then I probably made a mistake
> while copying the archive, you can try
> http://www-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/~parisse/giac/giac-1.2.2.
> On 5/07/2016, at 17:13, parisse wrote:
>
> disable-gui should be working. If not, then I probably made a mistake while
> copying the archive, you can try
> http://www-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/~parisse/giac/giac-1.2.2.tar.gz
Yes that tarball has the goods. I’ll wait for a new 1.2.2-xx tarball
On Tuesday, July 5, 2016 at 6:13:53 AM UTC+1, parisse wrote:
>
> disable-gui should be working. If not, then I probably made a mistake
> while copying the archive, you can try
> http://www-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/~parisse/giac/giac-1.2.2.tar.gz
> I don't know what you mean by ETA, but disable-a
disable-gui should be working. If not, then I probably made a mistake while
copying the archive, you can try
http://www-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/~parisse/giac/giac-1.2.2.tar.gz
I don't know what you mean by ETA, but disable-ao should also be working.
For lapack, it was a little nightmare before I
On 04/07/16 22:41, parisse wrote:
I'm fixing the build for --disable-gui
And I am guessing you didn't mean that it would be in 1.2.2-65 either.
I am still getting
/bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-g++
-DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -DIN_GIAC -I. -I.. -I. -I..
On 04/07/16 22:41, parisse wrote:
I will also add a --disable-ao flag in configure.in (ao is used for the
playsnd command)
Do you have an ETA for that? I noticed it has not landed in 1.2.2-65.
Francois
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel"
> On 4/07/2016, at 22:41, parisse wrote:
>
>
> I'm fixing the build for --disable-gui and I will also add a --disable-ao
> flag in configure.in (ao is used for the playsnd command). You can
> --disable-lapack if you think it will cause problems, LAPACK is interesting
> inside giac only for l
Le lundi 4 juillet 2016 04:14:26 UTC+2, François a écrit :
>
> So I have been inspecting giac, as any discussion of making something
> a standard package as an impact for sage-on-gentoo.
> We have an old version in the science overlay so I am working on
> upgrading it.
>
> 1) current 1.2.2-63
> On 4/07/2016, at 20:45, Thierry wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 02:14:20PM +1200, François Bissey wrote:
>> So I have been inspecting giac, as any discussion of making something
>> a standard package as an impact for sage-on-gentoo.
>> We have an old version in the science overlay
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 02:14:20PM +1200, François Bissey wrote:
> So I have been inspecting giac, as any discussion of making something
> a standard package as an impact for sage-on-gentoo.
> We have an old version in the science overlay so I am working on
> upgrading it.
>
> 1) current 1.2.
So I have been inspecting giac, as any discussion of making something
a standard package as an impact for sage-on-gentoo.
We have an old version in the science overlay so I am working on
upgrading it.
1) current 1.2.2-63 and a few earlier versions need the gui, compiling
with "--disable-gui" is b
26 matches
Mail list logo
