Hello, A brief follow-up to my message below.
The message was sent two days ago, and I would appreciate any pointer to the appropriate Debian Science maintainer or Salsa project for gmpfrxx_mkII and MPLAPACK. In particular, should I: - file an ITP for gmpfrxx_mkII and MPLAPACK; - wait for an existing packaging effort; - coordinate this through another Debian team? I would like to avoid filing a duplicate ITP or using the wrong package names and Salsa namespace. The dependent Octave package is: https://github.com/nakatamaho/octave-mplapack Thank you, On Sun, Sep 20, 2026 at 6:17 PM Maho NAKATA <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello Debian Science, > > I am preparing Debian packages for the released gmpfrxx_mkII 1.4.1 > and MPLAPACK 3.0.1 stack. They are used by the released > octave-mplapack-interop 0.5.0 package. > > Could the team advise on: > > - package ownership and co-maintenance; > - source/binary package names; > - the gmpfrxx provider SONAME and symbols policy; > - MPLAPACK symbols and Multi-Arch policy; > - Salsa repository placement? > > Review-only packaging drafts and local QA evidence are available at: > > > https://github.com/nakatamaho/octave-mplapack/tree/topic/reldeb00-debian-ppa/release/debian > > No Debian team approval or ITP has been claimed yet.
