Re: RFS: libsbml
On Tue, 6 Feb 2007, Charles Plessy wrote: What is happening to a source package with build-dependancies on a non-free package. Can it produce a binary packages for main, with only a -doc package going in contrib? Do the Debian buildds have non-free enabled? (I doubt...) It is quite a sloppy issue. The reaosn is that the resulting binary doc package does not even need any non-free stuff so there is no real reason to move it to contrib. This is quite a difficult topic and might be either discussed here or on debian-legal (perhaps on debian-devel). In this special case I wrote in private mail to Changyan Xie that I would rethink my request for compiling html from source because we are perfectly able to patch HTML documents (in contrast to PDFs) and would avoid serious and quite boring licensing issues. In the other hand Do you think that there are other converters around which can to the same job ? I have just read that there are two other free converters. I would give these a chance before continue thinking about nasty licensing issues. If we decide to keep latex2html, maybe we can try to add texlive-latex-recommended and texlive-fonts-recommended to the build-dependancies, so that it would avoid to use tetex-extra? If there is an alternative dependency on a package you need in your build dependencies you could list it in you build dependencies as well as an alternative (if I'm not completely wrong). Either the build dependency is fullfilled on your machine or in a chroot the first alternative is choosen (not tested but guessed). Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: libsbml
Hello all, 2007/2/6, Charles Plessy [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Filename: pool/non-free/l/latex2html/latex2html_2002-2-1-20050114-5_all.deb ^ What is happening to a source package with build-dependancies on a non-free package. Can it produce a binary packages for main, with only a -doc package going in contrib? Do the Debian buildds have non-free enabled? (I doubt...) Unfortunately, libsbml uses latex2html-specific scripted commands which resides in libsbml.perl and libsbmlextra.perl and it seems we cannot simply replace it with another tool. According to the following post on l2h, latex2html is marked non-free because its license term forces the distribution of itself to be done without charge. http://www.tug.org/pipermail/latex2html/2003-October/002453.html So using it solely for building package doesn't look like an issue to me. Probably I'm missing something though. Regards, Moriyoshi -- Moriyoshi Koizumi [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also reachable on [EMAIL PROTECTED]) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: libsbml
Hello Panchoat, I was finally managed to merge your effort with my stuff. Please look at the following diff: http://voltex.jp/downloads/libsbml_2.3.4-2.diff.gz Regarding the gcj issue, I forgot to mention that I actually patched to java.m4 to get it to work :) My apologies for that. Thanks, Moriyoshi 2007/2/4, Panchoat [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Dear Moriyoshi: I correct the description and the gcc-3.4 dependence problems, and upload the packages to mentors.debian.net ftp site. In these days, I try to build them by libgcj7-dev and gcj-4.1, but I failed, can you show your patch for successfully building the package with gcj? The idea we came up with last week was to prepare an entry on the Debian-Med SVN (http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med/, http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/debian-med) for the package. Andreas volunteered as an initial sponsor and I volunteered to take over sponsoring once I am accepted as a DD. I have registed a user name panchoat-guest in alioth too, but what should I do next? It is very good news to see these packages arriving in Debian. Unfortunately, I am completely ignorant of java, so I can not review them. I have however one small comment: it has been said some time ago on debian-devel that having packages with very similar descriptions is disturbing when people make keyword-based searches. Maybe you could try to give a specific description for each package ? I have fixed these, thank you for your advise! -- Moriyoshi Koizumi [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also reachable on [EMAIL PROTECTED]) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: libsbml
Hi Moriyoshi: I have looked over all the patch stuff! Your work are excellent! But I have a little opinion on the libsbml-doc package and the build dependence to latex2html: the upstream offer a seperated libsbml-doc source package,which contained compiled html and pdf document. So, why not just use this source rather than to compile it? from my side, I think the dependence to latex is evitable and this will save a lot of compiling time. Best regards Changyan Xie On 一, 2007-02-05 at 17:58 +0900, Moriyoshi Koizumi wrote: Hello Panchoat, I was finally managed to merge your effort with my stuff. Please look at the following diff: http://voltex.jp/downloads/libsbml_2.3.4-2.diff.gz Regarding the gcj issue, I forgot to mention that I actually patched to java.m4 to get it to work :) My apologies for that. Thanks, Moriyoshi -- Changyan Xie [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: libsbml
On Mon, 5 Feb 2007, Changyan Xie wrote: I have looked over all the patch stuff! Your work are excellent! But I have a little opinion on the libsbml-doc package and the build dependence to latex2html: the upstream offer a seperated libsbml-doc source package,which contained compiled html and pdf document. So, why not just use this source rather than to compile it? from my side, I think the dependence to latex is evitable and this will save a lot of compiling time. Well, in a Debian source package we provide the *source*. The rationale is if you need to patch something in the docs you will have problems to modify a PDF. So compiling the docs is really a good idea and the compile time should not really be an argument here. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: libsbml
Dear Andreas: Ok, I admit that the real problem is that the dependence to latex2html require tetex-extra and a lot of other packages,and after this additional dependence, my system require another 100 M disk space. I don't like installing a lot of packages just because an unnecessary package. I believe other people may feel the same like me. Why not just left this an option to user? I mean, in the upstream source, to build the doc is optional, we can just left this like the original source. Another reason, we have an analogue: this package support matlab binding too. Of course, we will not enable this binding by default. but user can simply apt-get source and add this support. This is just like the doc package's situation, we can disable it by default, but easily enable it. Further more, I think there will be few people want to patch doc package, writing the right doc is the responsibility of upstream authors. I consider that's why the upstream authors offer a compiled doc package for us. best regards Changyan Xie On 一, 2007-02-05 at 12:47 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: Well, in a Debian source package we provide the *source*. The rationale is if you need to patch something in the docs you will have problems to modify a PDF. So compiling the docs is really a good idea and the compile time should not really be an argument here. Kind regards Andreas. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: libsbml
On Tue, 6 Feb 2007, Changyan Xie wrote: Ok, I admit that the real problem is that the dependence to latex2html require tetex-extra and a lot of other packages,and after this additional dependence, my system require another 100 M disk space. If it is about bloating your production system I would suggest to use pbuilder which installs all this stuff into a chroot and will remove it afterwards. This does not really make the build process faster but keeps your system clean and has other additional advantages (like beeing sure that all build-dependencies are mentioned and ensures more or less that auto-builders will probably work). I'm unsure but there is a chance that an alternative build-dependency to texlive that is known to be packages more fine grainded might be possible with less disk space than you mentioned. I don't like installing a lot of packages just because an unnecessary package. Well, whether something is unnecessary depends from the point of view. To build libsmbl from source it seems to be necessary. I believe other people may feel the same like me. Why not just left this an option to user? I mean, in the upstream source, to build the doc is optional, we can just left this like the original source. If you ask me I would rather leave the compiled docs out of the source tarball because these ar not necessary. Another reason, we have an analogue: this package support matlab binding too. Of course, we will not enable this binding by default. but user can simply apt-get source and add this support. This is just like the doc package's situation, we can disable it by default, but easily enable it. Not really. Docs are always welcome and if they are free they should be packaged. Matlab is neither free nor exist a package so this support would be not reasonable. Further more, I think there will be few people want to patch doc package, Ahh, really? You will be astonished how many reasons might be or how many bug reports you might gather for a pretended simple doc package. I can asure you that the package maintainer of a doc package has good chances to be forced to patch the docs. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: libsbml
Le Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 02:33:17AM +0800, Changyan Xie a écrit : Dear Andreas: Ok, I admit that the real problem is that the dependence to latex2html Dear all, indeed, I just noticed the following : sorbet【~】$ apt-cache show latex2html Package: latex2html Priority: optional Section: non-free/tex Installed-Size: 7128 Maintainer: Roland Stigge [EMAIL PROTECTED] Architecture: all Version: 2002-2-1-20050114-5 Depends: perl, netpbm (= 2:9.20), gs, tetex-bin (= 1.0.7+20001218) | texlive-base-bin, tetex-extra | texlive-latex-recommended, tetex-extra | texlive-fonts-recommended, perl-doc Conflicts: tetex-base ( 0.9.990311-2) Filename: pool/non-free/l/latex2html/latex2html_2002-2-1-20050114-5_all.deb ^ What is happening to a source package with build-dependancies on a non-free package. Can it produce a binary packages for main, with only a -doc package going in contrib? Do the Debian buildds have non-free enabled? (I doubt...) Do you think that there are other converters around which can to the same job ? If we decide to keep latex2html, maybe we can try to add texlive-latex-recommended and texlive-fonts-recommended to the build-dependancies, so that it would avoid to use tetex-extra? Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy http://charles.plessy.org Wako, Saitama, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: libsbml
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 08:19:31 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: indeed, I just noticed the following : sorbet???~???$ apt-cache show latex2html Filename: pool/non-free/l/latex2html/latex2html_2002-2-1-20050114-5_all.deb ^ Do you think that there are other converters around which can to the same job ? hevea: translates from LaTeX to HTML, info, or text (I've never used it myself) gregor -- .''`. http://info.comodo.priv.at/ | gpg key ID: 0x00F3CFE4 : :' : debian: the universal operating system - http://www.debian.org/ `. `' member of https://www.vibe.at/ | how to reply: http://got.to/quote/ `-NP: Janis Joplin: Misery 'n signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: RFS: libsbml
Hello, On Tue, 06 Feb 2007, Charles Plessy wrote: $ apt-cache show latex2html Package: latex2html Priority: optional Section: non-free/tex There are alternatives like hevea and tex4ht. Both of them work on generic LaTeX documents. Unusual uses of latex may require fine tuning to get the correct output. I maintain tex4ht and I think that its structure makes it less likely to fail than either hevea or latex2html. So if it fails to translate your document please file a bug report :-) I know of at least a couple of packages that used to depend on latex2html and have switched to tex4ht after it was found that some aspects of the latex2html license made it non-free. Regards, Kapil. -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: RFS: libsbml
Dear Moriyoshi: I correct the description and the gcc-3.4 dependence problems, and upload the packages to mentors.debian.net ftp site. In these days, I try to build them by libgcj7-dev and gcj-4.1, but I failed, can you show your patch for successfully building the package with gcj? The idea we came up with last week was to prepare an entry on the Debian-Med SVN (http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med/, http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/debian-med) for the package. Andreas volunteered as an initial sponsor and I volunteered to take over sponsoring once I am accepted as a DD. I have registed a user name panchoat-guest in alioth too, but what should I do next? It is very good news to see these packages arriving in Debian. Unfortunately, I am completely ignorant of java, so I can not review them. I have however one small comment: it has been said some time ago on debian-devel that having packages with very similar descriptions is disturbing when people make keyword-based searches. Maybe you could try to give a specific description for each package ? I have fixed these, thank you for your advise! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: libsbml
Dear Moriyoshi, On Tuesday 30 January 2007 08:37:55 Moriyoshi Koizumi wrote: Just a side note: I'm a full-time scientific programmer at the Keio University, working specifically on the E-Cell project (http://www.e-cell.org/ ) that aims to create a versatile in-silico simulator and related toolkits. I was once addressing the packaging of e-cell myself but failed somewhere in the middle - three years ago? Somehow I feel that it would be lovely if you would find some energy reserves of yours to address the packaging of E-cell as I presume it would considerably raise the acceptance of Debian in biological labs. 2007/1/29, Steffen Moeller [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [...] Dear Moriyoshi and dear Changyan, please get in contact with each other for an exchange of ideas for the package. Whoever wishes to go forward with the maintenance should do so. A SVN-based group maintenance would be preferable from my point of view as it does not harm and is much fun if it works out nicely. It is in no way required, though. Andreas? Sure I will. Would anyone give some advice what is necessary to collaborate on it right now? I so far got my alioth account (moriyoshi-guest). I'm rather new to the arrangement of the Debian development though I've been involved in several opensource projects in the past, so any help would be thankful. Andreas or Charles (who also lives in Japan, btw), will add you to Debian Med and with it comes the access to the svn repository. This is a lovely setup for the communication between the sponsor, the sponsee and the community. It is (particularly for larger projects) only the debian folder that is injected to the repository, btw. Instructions are on the Debian-Med wiki page. I do not see any principal difference to general Open Source developments. Let us wait for what the direct communication between you and Changyan will bring. Knowing that you are affiliated with e-Cell, I of course hope that you will focus on a packaging of that rather than on the library underneath and hope to win you both for a fruitful collaboration in Debian Med. Best regards Steffen -- Dr. Steffen Möller University of Lübeck Institute of Neuro- and Bioinformatics Ratzeburger Allee 160 23538 Lübeck Germany T: +49 451 500 5504 F: +49 451 500 5502 [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpPZ5E9Wb3bF.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: libsbml
Dear Moriyoshi: What a coincidence! Maybe it is just because the number of sbml users is larger and larger. :-) I have try to use gcj-4.1 and free-java-sdk, but It always fail to build. The potential cause may be the swig version or anything else, but I didn't try to patch it. In the other hand, the sun-java work fine. Considering that the sun-java is open-sourcing , I think this dependence may not be a problem in the future. Anyway, if this dependence can be fixed, it is always better. btw, I write a dependence to g++-3.4, but it seems unnecessary. g++-4.1 work fine with a little change in source code. I'd be glad to colaborate with you. ;-) On 二, 2007-01-30 at 16:37 +0900, Moriyoshi Koizumi wrote: Hello there, Just a side note: I'm a full-time scientific programmer at the Keio University, working specifically on the E-Cell project (http://www.e-cell.org/ ) that aims to create a versatile in-silico simulator and related toolkits. 2007/1/29, Steffen Moeller [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Dear Changyan (also, please correct/apologize if I address you wrongly), dear Charles, this is quite a coincidence. I'm also surprised at the coincidence that happened merely in a week :-) The SBML libraries have two rather ancient ITPs (#24,#277748) of mine and Andrea Tasso. Just last week I got a patch to my diff.gz. thus bringing it up to the latest level, sent in by Moriyoshi Koizumi who is on this email's CC line. The idea we came up with last week was to prepare an entry on the Debian-Med SVN (http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med/, http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/debian-med) for the package. Andreas volunteered as an initial sponsor and I volunteered to take over sponsoring once I am accepted as a DD. Dear Moriyoshi and dear Changyan, please get in contact with each other for an exchange of ideas for the package. Whoever wishes to go forward with the maintenance should do so. A SVN-based group maintenance would be preferable from my point of view as it does not harm and is much fun if it works out nicely. It is in no way required, though. Andreas? Sure I will. Would anyone give some advice what is necessary to collaborate on it right now? I so far got my alioth account (moriyoshi-guest). I'm rather new to the arrangement of the Debian development though I've been involved in several opensource projects in the past, so any help would be thankful. It is very good news to see these packages arriving in Debian. Unfortunately, I am completely ignorant of java, so I can not review them. I have however one small comment: it has been said some time ago on debian-devel that having packages with very similar descriptions is disturbing when people make keyword-based searches. Maybe you could try to give a specific description for each package ? Just my two yen's worth: Despite the following statement mentioned in the quoted mail, sun-java wasn't necessary for me to build the Java package. libgcj-dev will suffice because they shares the same ABI and pretty much the same thing did in many other Debian java library packages AFAIK. Section : contrib/science(because to compile the java binding package use sun-java) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: libsbml
Dear Changyan (also, please correct/apologize if I address you wrongly), dear Charles, this is quite a coincidence. The SBML libraries have two rather ancient ITPs (#24,#277748) of mine and Andrea Tasso. Just last week I got a patch to my diff.gz. thus bringing it up to the latest level, sent in by Moriyoshi Koizumi who is on this email's CC line. The idea we came up with last week was to prepare an entry on the Debian-Med SVN (http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med/, http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/debian-med) for the package. Andreas volunteered as an initial sponsor and I volunteered to take over sponsoring once I am accepted as a DD. Dear Moriyoshi and dear Changyan, please get in contact with each other for an exchange of ideas for the package. Whoever wishes to go forward with the maintenance should do so. A SVN-based group maintenance would be preferable from my point of view as it does not harm and is much fun if it works out nicely. It is in no way required, though. Andreas? Best regards Steffen On Monday 29 January 2007 02:11:14 Charles Plessy wrote: Le Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 05:00:54PM +0800, Panchoat a écrit : Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package libsbml. * Package name: libsbml Version : 2.3.4-1 Upstream Author : The sbml team mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * URL : www.sbml.org * License : GPL Section : contrib/science(because to compile the java binding package use sun-java) It builds these binary packages: libsbml-dev - System Biology Markup Language Library libsbml-java - System Biology Markup Language Library -- Java Binding libsbml-perl - System Biology Markup Language Library libsbml1 - System Biology Markup Language Library python-sbml - System Biology Markup Language Library -- Python Binding sbml-examples - System Biology Markup Language Library Dear Changyan, (Please correct me if I use your last name incorrectly, or vice-versa). It is very good news to see these packages arriving in Debian. Unfortunately, I am completely ignorant of java, so I can not review them. I have however one small comment: it has been said some time ago on debian-devel that having packages with very similar descriptions is disturbing when people make keyword-based searches. Maybe you could try to give a specific description for each package ? It seems that you are interested in systems biology. I have started to list potential software of interest for Debian on our wiki: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianSystemsBiology Please feel free to contribute to it. (Also, I have added libsbml to http://wiki.debian.org/DebianBioinformaticsLibraries ) Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy http://charles.plessy.org Wako, Saitama, Japan -- Dr. Steffen Möller University of Lübeck Institute of Neuro- and Bioinformatics Ratzeburger Allee 160 23538 Lübeck Germany T: +49 451 500 5504 F: +49 451 500 5502 [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgp80052NvYpl.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: libsbml
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Steffen Moeller wrote: Dear Moriyoshi and dear Changyan, please get in contact with each other for an exchange of ideas for the package. Whoever wishes to go forward with the maintenance should do so. A SVN-based group maintenance would be preferable from my point of view as it does not harm and is much fun if it works out nicely. It is in no way required, though. Andreas? There is nothing to add from my side (and also no need to ask me in person - I will never stop anybody from doing reasonable things ;-) ) Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: libsbml
Hello there, Just a side note: I'm a full-time scientific programmer at the Keio University, working specifically on the E-Cell project (http://www.e-cell.org/ ) that aims to create a versatile in-silico simulator and related toolkits. 2007/1/29, Steffen Moeller [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Dear Changyan (also, please correct/apologize if I address you wrongly), dear Charles, this is quite a coincidence. I'm also surprised at the coincidence that happened merely in a week :-) The SBML libraries have two rather ancient ITPs (#24,#277748) of mine and Andrea Tasso. Just last week I got a patch to my diff.gz. thus bringing it up to the latest level, sent in by Moriyoshi Koizumi who is on this email's CC line. The idea we came up with last week was to prepare an entry on the Debian-Med SVN (http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med/, http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/debian-med) for the package. Andreas volunteered as an initial sponsor and I volunteered to take over sponsoring once I am accepted as a DD. Dear Moriyoshi and dear Changyan, please get in contact with each other for an exchange of ideas for the package. Whoever wishes to go forward with the maintenance should do so. A SVN-based group maintenance would be preferable from my point of view as it does not harm and is much fun if it works out nicely. It is in no way required, though. Andreas? Sure I will. Would anyone give some advice what is necessary to collaborate on it right now? I so far got my alioth account (moriyoshi-guest). I'm rather new to the arrangement of the Debian development though I've been involved in several opensource projects in the past, so any help would be thankful. It is very good news to see these packages arriving in Debian. Unfortunately, I am completely ignorant of java, so I can not review them. I have however one small comment: it has been said some time ago on debian-devel that having packages with very similar descriptions is disturbing when people make keyword-based searches. Maybe you could try to give a specific description for each package ? Just my two yen's worth: Despite the following statement mentioned in the quoted mail, sun-java wasn't necessary for me to build the Java package. libgcj-dev will suffice because they shares the same ABI and pretty much the same thing did in many other Debian java library packages AFAIK. Section : contrib/science(because to compile the java binding package use sun-java) -- Moriyoshi Koizumi [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also reachable on [EMAIL PROTECTED]) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RFS: libsbml
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package libsbml. * Package name: libsbml Version : 2.3.4-1 Upstream Author : The sbml team mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * URL : www.sbml.org * License : GPL Section : contrib/science(because to compile the java binding package use sun-java) It builds these binary packages: libsbml-dev - System Biology Markup Language Library libsbml-java - System Biology Markup Language Library -- Java Binding libsbml-perl - System Biology Markup Language Library libsbml1 - System Biology Markup Language Library python-sbml - System Biology Markup Language Library -- Python Binding sbml-examples - System Biology Markup Language Library This pacakges is in ITP for almost 3 years(1033 day), and it's really useful in network modeling, which is now almost the de facto standard of the system biology. the compile process is not so easy in debian. And this package's upstream is always working, the new version 3 will be soon release. The package is lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 24 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/contrib/l/libsbml - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/contrib/l/libsbml/libsbml_2.3.4-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Changyan Xie -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: libsbml
Le Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 05:00:54PM +0800, Panchoat a écrit : Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package libsbml. * Package name: libsbml Version : 2.3.4-1 Upstream Author : The sbml team mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * URL : www.sbml.org * License : GPL Section : contrib/science(because to compile the java binding package use sun-java) It builds these binary packages: libsbml-dev - System Biology Markup Language Library libsbml-java - System Biology Markup Language Library -- Java Binding libsbml-perl - System Biology Markup Language Library libsbml1 - System Biology Markup Language Library python-sbml - System Biology Markup Language Library -- Python Binding sbml-examples - System Biology Markup Language Library Dear Changyan, (Please correct me if I use your last name incorrectly, or vice-versa). It is very good news to see these packages arriving in Debian. Unfortunately, I am completely ignorant of java, so I can not review them. I have however one small comment: it has been said some time ago on debian-devel that having packages with very similar descriptions is disturbing when people make keyword-based searches. Maybe you could try to give a specific description for each package ? It seems that you are interested in systems biology. I have started to list potential software of interest for Debian on our wiki: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianSystemsBiology Please feel free to contribute to it. (Also, I have added libsbml to http://wiki.debian.org/DebianBioinformaticsLibraries ) Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy http://charles.plessy.org Wako, Saitama, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
