pspp 1.2.0-4 debian release
Hi Ben, Andreas had already fixed the texlive problem in the debian salsa repository. He also added the CVE-2019-9211 fix. I did some more changes and the 1.2.0-4 pspp should be ready for release. a) I tried to push the changes to the salsa repository but I am not allowed to do so. Therefore I have made a pull request with the changes: https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/pspp/-/merge_requests/1 b) I did an upload of the 1.2.0-4 package to mentors https://mentors.debian.net/package/pspp I did not address the python3 migration. That are a number of patches already in upstream and I suggest to do that with the next upstream release. Friedrich > Am 06.05.2020 um 20:24 schrieb Andreas Tille : > > Hi Friedrich, > > On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 03:51:34PM +0200, Friedrich Beckmann wrote: >> Hi John, hi Andreas >> >> the debian science team did the last CVE patches and wanted to maintain >> the package. I think the reason for removal is described here: >> >> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=932951 >> >> The science team moved the debian code to the salsa git repository and I >> found >> a patch (or at least something that might fix that) here: >> >> https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/pspp/-/commit/86bb103cbb9313ea70326a00223a2510e7462a0f >> >> @Andreas: I am not too sure about the release process - is there anything >> somebody must do to release this? > > I think I gave up un the Python3 migration. Please write to the team - > I'm personally not interested in pspp and flooded with work that is > connected to fight COVID-19 and I need to restrict my tasks in Debian to > this one for the moment. To get the package back into Debian somebody > needs to care for the Python3 migration and than the package needs to > pass the new queue again. > > Kinf regards > > Andreas. > > -- > http://fam-tille.de
Re: my plans about deep learning framework
Hi Mo, Mo Zhou, on 2020-05-07 14:15:15 +: > [[[ ROCm flavor of DL frameworks ]]] > > I still don't know how on earth can the ROCm software stack work with > the opensource `amdkfd` kernel driver (debian has already enabled that > driver for our kernel packages) instead of the proprietary version of > `amdkfd`. > > -- I'm willing to maintain the ROCm software stack as long as it is > able to work on a Debian system without non-free components. > There is a "ROCm Team" on salsa. > -- the answer to the above question is the only blocker for me to > make further progress about ROCm. I believe that I may be able to give a hand with this stack, although I'm still kind of green regarding Debian packaging. I don't expect it to be an easy task, but will see if I can help here. I just opened a request on Salsa to access the "AMD Yes! ROCm Team" group. Kind Regards, -- Étienne Mollier Fingerprint: 5ab1 4edf 63bb ccff 8b54 2fa9 59da 56fe fff3 882d Help find cures against the Covid-19 ! Give CPU cycles: * Rosetta@home: https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/ * Folding@home: https://foldingathome.org/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: license problem about nvidia's neural network library (cuDNN)
Hi Rebecca, I have completely forgot the threads I opened in the past. However, the cuDNN eula had been revised many times since the last discussion. The latest revision was made on Nov 2019. That means a re-evaluation is needed. On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 05:19:03PM +0100, Rebecca N. Palmer wrote: > Previous discussions: > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=862524 > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=887728 >
Re: license problem about nvidia's neural network library (cuDNN)
Previous discussions: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=862524 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=887728
license problem about nvidia's neural network library (cuDNN)
Hello guys, I mentioned cudnn in the other mail about my "plans for deep learning frameworks". In this separate mail I'm talking about the licensing issue about cudnn, the most important CUDA library for neural networks. https://docs.nvidia.com/deeplearning/sdk/cudnn-sla/index.html Do you have any idea whether this can be uploaded to our non-free archive? I HATE NVIDIA. Reading that license makes me painful. I cannot understand whether on earth can we redistribute cuDNN through our non-free archive. Another solution which came up in my mind, for bypassing the license issue is to create a meta package `cudnn-installer` with postinst hooks that downloads and manually installs the library blobs.
my plans about deep learning framework
Hi Science and Med Team, I maintain lots of packages related to deep learning and machine learning, but I think I'm reaching an upperbound. So I'm clearly stating my future plans about deep learning packages for Debian, lest potential contributors hesitate to step in and help. Med team has been added in the recipient list due to their increasing interest in deep/machine learning, and the coronavirus related works. [[[ DL frameworks ]]] My emergy only allows me to cover one modern deep learning framework -- pytorch. I'm very likely unable to help the tensorflow maintenance once bazel gets ready in our archive. I can keep maintaining some tensorflow dependencies since some of them are quite stable. -- I'll only maintain caffe and pytorch. Potential contributors should feel free to deal with any other DL frameworks. -- I can provide suggestions, but I'll not provide code. [[[ CUDA flavor of DL frameworks ]]] Currently I only have the plan to do the cpu version of pytorch (and caffe). The cuda version of caffe had been removed by me because I hate dealing with cuda related stuff in the debian archive. -- I'll not package the most important CUDA library -- cuDNN -- for deep learning frameworks. We need other volunteers for this. -- If someone is willing to maintain cuDNN, I can try to package the cuda version of pytorch [[[ ROCm flavor of DL frameworks ]]] I still don't know how on earth can the ROCm software stack work with the opensource `amdkfd` kernel driver (debian has already enabled that driver for our kernel packages) instead of the proprietary version of `amdkfd`. -- I'm willing to maintain the ROCm software stack as long as it is able to work on a Debian system without non-free components. There is a "ROCm Team" on salsa. -- the answer to the above question is the only blocker for me to make further progress about ROCm. [[[ upper layer applications ]]] -- I'll not maintain any upper layer applications built upon any deep learning framework. -- But I'll maintain ML-Policy to guide the maintenance of these packages. -- I may maintain some toy dataset packages for testing DL framework sanity e.g. src:dataset-fashion-mnist (already in testing and sid) --- These are all things I can do, and I'm not a monoplic maintainer. Volunteers are always welcome, and helps are always appreciated!
Re: PSPP removed from Debian
Hi Andreas, thanks for the update and good luck with corona. Friedrich > Am 06.05.2020 um 20:24 schrieb Andreas Tille : > > Hi Friedrich, > > On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 03:51:34PM +0200, Friedrich Beckmann wrote: >> Hi John, hi Andreas >> >> the debian science team did the last CVE patches and wanted to maintain >> the package. I think the reason for removal is described here: >> >> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=932951 >> >> The science team moved the debian code to the salsa git repository and I >> found >> a patch (or at least something that might fix that) here: >> >> https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/pspp/-/commit/86bb103cbb9313ea70326a00223a2510e7462a0f >> >> @Andreas: I am not too sure about the release process - is there anything >> somebody must do to release this? > > I think I gave up un the Python3 migration. Please write to the team - > I'm personally not interested in pspp and flooded with work that is > connected to fight COVID-19 and I need to restrict my tasks in Debian to > this one for the moment. To get the package back into Debian somebody > needs to care for the Python3 migration and than the package needs to > pass the new queue again. > > Kinf regards > > Andreas. > > -- > http://fam-tille.de
