Re: libscotch-dev/7.0.1-2: Why is there no libscotchmetis.so?
Am Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 11:51:38PM +0100 schrieb Drew Parsons: As for /usr/share/dune/cmake/modules/FindMETIS.cmake, it does handle the scotchmetis version via METIS_API_VERSION If it's then going to look for find_library(METIS_LIBRARY scotchmetis), then for scotch 7 that should be updated to find_library(METIS_LIBRARY scotchmetisv$(METIS_API_VERSION)) Thanks. Already provided a patch https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/dune-common/-/merge_requests/3
Re: libscotch-dev/7.0.1-2: Why is there no libscotchmetis.so?
On 2022-03-18 23:13, Drew Parsons wrote: On 2022-03-18 21:50, Markus Blatt wrote: Hi, while investigating several bugs [1] [2] [3] caused by the scotch transition, I started wondering why there is no libscotchmetis.so library but just libscotchmetisv3.so and libscotchmetisv5.so. .. It would be like that because if you want to use scotch, then libscotch.so is what you want to link against, not libscotchmetis.so. libscotchmetis.so (v3 or v5) is a (partial) compatibility library for metis, so if it's metis that you want, without wanting to explicitly specify the version, then I think you want to link against libmetis.so, not libscotchmets.so. Why is FindMETIS.cmake looking for libscotchmetis.so instead of libmetis.so? As for /usr/share/dune/cmake/modules/FindMETIS.cmake, it does handle the scotchmetis version via METIS_API_VERSION If it's then going to look for find_library(METIS_LIBRARY scotchmetis), then for scotch 7 that should be updated to find_library(METIS_LIBRARY scotchmetisv$(METIS_API_VERSION)) Drew
Re: libscotch-dev/7.0.1-2: Why is there no libscotchmetis.so?
On 2022-03-18 21:50, Markus Blatt wrote: Hi, while investigating several bugs [1] [2] [3] caused by the scotch transition, I started wondering why there is no libscotchmetis.so library but just libscotchmetisv3.so and libscotchmetisv5.so. The cause for the bugs seems to be that the CMake scripts only search for libscotchmetis.so. This can be fixed in dune-common by searching for the correct version. An alternative fix might be that libscotch-dev also ships a libscotchmetis.so that points to one of those. It would be like that because if you want to use scotch, then libscotch.so is what you want to link against, not libscotchmetis.so. libscotchmetis.so (v3 or v5) is a (partial) compatibility library for metis, so if it's metis that you want, without wanting to explicitly specify the version, then I think you want to link against libmetis.so, not libscotchmets.so. Why is FindMETIS.cmake looking for libscotchmetis.so instead of libmetis.so? Drew
libscotch-dev/7.0.1-2: Why is there no libscotchmetis.so?
Hi, while investigating several bugs [1] [2] [3] caused by the scotch transition, I started wondering why there is no libscotchmetis.so library but just libscotchmetisv3.so and libscotchmetisv5.so. The cause for the bugs seems to be that the CMake scripts only search for libscotchmetis.so. This can be fixed in dune-common by searching for the correct version. An alternative fix might be that libscotch-dev also ships a libscotchmetis.so that points to one of those. Markus [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1007823 [2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1007830 [3] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1007930 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Updating qiskit-* packages?
On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 05:01:01PM +0100, Diego M. Rodriguez wrote: > What would be the most sensible way to signal either that help would be > needed, or that the effort has stopped? We informally thought of > orphaning the package, but if there is indeed interest, might not be the > best approach. RFH looks suitable: | "Request For Help". The current maintainer wants to continue | to maintain this package, but he/she needs some help to do this, because | his/her time is limited or the package is quite big and needs several | maintainers. Or if you do not want to maintain it, you can file a RFA which means you will temporarily maintain it but the package needs a new maintainer anyway Regards, Nilesh signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Updating qiskit-* packages?
Hello Nilesh, On 3/13/22 8:26 AM, Nilesh Patra wrote: > Since they are > important/interesting packages for quantum computing, I wished to ask if you > might > have plans to update it to latest upstream in near future? Or have worked on > it locally maybe? Unfortunately, the answer to both questions would be "no". With upstream moving faster indeed than originally anticipated, and with Luciano planning to officially step down from his Debian duties, I no longer have the energy, bandwidth and skills to realistically maintain the packaging effort on par with latest upstream releases. What would be the most sensible way to signal either that help would be needed, or that the effort has stopped? We informally thought of orphaning the package, but if there is indeed interest, might not be the best approach. Best - and thanks for the work on the latest 0.12.0-4 upload, -- Diego M. Rodriguez
