On Dec 4 19:03, Achim Gratz wrote:
Ken Brown writes:
There's one small problem with _incautorebase as it stands: When the
package is first installed, the script 001_incautorebase.dash will get
run *after* all 0p_* scripts have been run. But it needs to run
first. Something like the
Hi,
isn't it rather annoying that even Base packages have dependencies
outside the Base category? So, even if I perform a plain Base-only
installation, I get asked if dependencies shall be fullfilled, which, as
a question, is more than borderline anyway.
Therefore, shouldn't we put all packages
Corinna Vinschen writes:
Commit/Push (don't forget to add the ChangeLog entry!):
$ cvs ci
The patches to setup are committed. ITP for incremental autorebase will
follow, but maybe not this weekend.
Regards,
Achim.
--
+[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]+
Corinna Vinschen writes:
Before you ITP the package, can you please rename it to _autorebase?
I'd really like the package to be a replacement for _autorebase. We
just have to make sure to switch off the autodep stuff.
Sure, I can do that.
Or is there anything missing if we do that?
Nothing
On 12/6/2014 11:57 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Hi,
isn't it rather annoying that even Base packages have dependencies
outside the Base category? So, even if I perform a plain Base-only
installation, I get asked if dependencies shall be fullfilled, which, as
a question, is more than borderline
On Dec 6 12:40, Ken Brown wrote:
On 12/6/2014 11:57 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Hi,
isn't it rather annoying that even Base packages have dependencies
outside the Base category? So, even if I perform a plain Base-only
installation, I get asked if dependencies shall be fullfilled, which,
On 12/6/2014 12:57 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Dec 6 12:40, Ken Brown wrote:
On 12/6/2014 11:57 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Hi,
isn't it rather annoying that even Base packages have dependencies
outside the Base category? So, even if I perform a plain Base-only
installation, I get asked
isn't it rather annoying that even Base packages have dependencies
outside the Base category? So, even if I perform a plain Base-only
installation, I get asked if dependencies shall be fullfilled, which, as
a question, is more than borderline anyway.
Therefore, shouldn't we put all
On Dec 6 18:34, Achim Gratz wrote:
Corinna Vinschen writes:
Commit/Push (don't forget to add the ChangeLog entry!):
$ cvs ci
The patches to setup are committed. ITP for incremental autorebase will
follow, but maybe not this weekend.
Thanks. IIUC, we will have to upload a new
On Dec 6 13:21, Ken Brown wrote:
On 12/6/2014 12:57 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Dec 6 12:40, Ken Brown wrote:
On 12/6/2014 11:57 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Hi,
isn't it rather annoying that even Base packages have dependencies
outside the Base category? So, even if I perform a plain
On Dec 6 13:52, Andrew Schulman wrote:
isn't it rather annoying that even Base packages have dependencies
outside the Base category? So, even if I perform a plain Base-only
installation, I get asked if dependencies shall be fullfilled, which, as
a question, is more than borderline
On Dec 6 20:30, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Dec 6 18:34, Achim Gratz wrote:
Corinna Vinschen writes:
Commit/Push (don't forget to add the ChangeLog entry!):
$ cvs ci
The patches to setup are committed. ITP for incremental autorebase will
follow, but maybe not this
Corinna Vinschen writes:
The patches to setup are committed. ITP for incremental autorebase will
follow, but maybe not this weekend.
Thanks. IIUC, we will have to upload a new setup anyway before the
new and improved autorebase will work.
Yes, I'll try to remember to make a note of that in
On 06/12/2014 18:52, Andrew Schulman wrote:
isn't it rather annoying that even Base packages have dependencies
outside the Base category? So, even if I perform a plain Base-only
installation, I get asked if dependencies shall be fullfilled, which, as
a question, is more than borderline anyway.
Corinna Vinschen writes:
Btw., if I ask you if you'd like to improve _update-info-dir the same way,
would you be terribly disgusted?
I haven't been doing much of anything info related lately, though I
don't think it would be a too difficult thing to do. But at the moment
I can't promise to
David Stacey writes:
I have to agree with Andrew here. Dependencies change, so decide what
should be in 'Base' and let dependencies be pulled in as required. I
have never been overly concerned that there are dependencies outside
of 'Base'.
We could make setup pull all dependencies of Base
OpenBLAS is an optimized BLAS library based on GotoBLAS2 1.13 BSD
version. OpenBLAS is licensed under the 3-clause BSD license.
http://www.openblas.net/
Already available in most linux distri.
to download (remove the index.html's) :
On 12/6/2014 10:55 PM, Marco Atzeri wrote:
OpenBLAS is an optimized BLAS library based on GotoBLAS2 1.13 BSD
version. OpenBLAS is licensed under the 3-clause BSD license.
http://www.openblas.net/
Already available in most linux distri.
to download (remove the index.html's) :
On 06/12/14 21:19, Achim Gratz wrote:
Maybe what we should consider is removing the 'Select required
packages (RECOMMENDED)' check box on the 'Resolving Dependencies' page
in the installer. Under what use case is unticking this a sensible
idea?
Since setup doesn't have something like soft
19 matches
Mail list logo
