#10187: Update ecl and maxima
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------
Reporter: vbraun | Owner: tbd
Type: defect | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-4.6.1
Component: packages | Keywords:
Author: Volker Braun, David Kirkby | Upstream: Workaround found; Bug
reported upstream.
Reviewer: Karl-Dieter Crisman | Merged:
Work_issues: |
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------
Comment(by drkirkby):
Replying to [comment:63 leif]:
> The Maxima spkg IMHO needs work; not sure if on another ticket. (I guess
the authors will say yes; I personally don't like postponing spkg changes
very much, since this tends to make them never happen, or leads to
concurrent, "incompatible" changes.)
A point that needs to be born in mind is that whilst the Maxima package
may not be perfect (I've not looked myself), a failure to update ECL and
Maxima will mean Sage will not build on the latest version of Fedora,
which is the second most popular linux distro. So I feel there is some
argument here for possibly accepting a package that could be improved. (I
say this, despite having no involvement whatsoever in updating the Maxima
package). But ECL and Maxima need to done together.
* I've removed the src/contrib/encodings/ directory in the ECL package,
and corrected comments in SPKG.txt about this.
* I've removed the {{{cp patches/bytecodes.h src/src/h/bytecodes.h}}} in
the ECL package, along iwth the comments attached to why the copy was
being made. (Basically the patch suggested by the ECL developer did not
work on the latest stable ECL - only on a CVS snapshot).
* I've updated the ecl-10.4.1.spkg. The changes should be totally
harmless - a copy which would never have occured, some changes of comments
and the removal of some unused files. The md5 checksum should be
{{{7a0d66ee152b847009b23b1dbbfeb75d}}}
> Such a patch to `configure` is a very good use case for the newly
included GNU `patch`, since `configure` is huge while the patch is tiny,
so putting a patched copy in `patches/` would again - now really
unnecessarily - increase the size of the resulting spkg.
Agreed, but it would be unwise to start using GNU patch here for several
reasons.
* We have not agreed on how its best used (that's the subject of #9419)
* Patch is not in any stable release of Sage. It would be unwise to
switch to using it extensively just now.
* Robert Bradshaw stated we should not mix use the use of {{{patch}}} and
{{{cp}}} in the same package. I'm not sure if I agree with that or not. I
can see his logic, though I can see it could be an error prone process
converting all the cp's to patches.
> I'm not sure if there are other changes from the previous attempt to
update ECL not made in the current spkg here.
I'm not aware of any.
Dave
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10187#comment:72>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.
