On 04/18/2017 02:25 PM, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi Tobias, > > On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 01:45:01PM +0100, Tobias Hansen wrote: >>> >>> Despite I'm not sure whether I fully understand this table I'll grab my >>> hat as Debian Med maintainer and backport biopython. >> >> The left column shows the versions of the packages that >> sage-the-distribution 7.4 uses. The right column shows either the >> version in jessie or (if the version in jessie is smaller than the one >> of sage and there is a package in jessie-backports) the version in >> jessie-backports. >> >> The colors just mean: red or orange = potentially bad. > > So far for the legend but I was thinking how bad are so many potentially > bad entries. I also stumbled about "missing" gcc, and what missing > "readline" might mean. > > Kind regards > > Andreas. >
gcc and readline are just listed as missing because the names of the Debian source packages changed between jessie and stretch. I added two more checkboxes so now you can hide all the blue and green entries. General purpose packages such as general python packages normally have a better chance to maintain compatibility than the math packages. I would start by fixing brial and backporting the list I gave you yesterday and then look at the tests and see which of the other red entries need to be backported. You should compare this to https://people.debian.org/~thansen/debian-sage-7.4-status.html That means at least the red/orange entries for configparser, cvxopt and ecl are fine. You can probably get away with many more, the question is just which ones. Best, Tobias
