to the previous version of the package. Keeping the whole
history of the package will facilitate the long-term maintenance.
See https://tracker.debian.org/media/packages/c/cuba/changelog-3.0%2B2024-2
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.vil
Le vendredi 05 avril 2019 à 12:06 +0200, Francesco Montanari a écrit :
> On 4/4/19 9:13 AM, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> > 2. Put the packaging on salsa.debian.org in the science-team group
> >
> https://salsa.debian.org/science-team
>
> >(you’ll need so
licy:
https://science-team.pages.debian.net/policy/
In particular, in the future, sponsorship requests should be done by
simply sending an adequately formatted message to debian-science@l.d.o.
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.v
rs files are useless;
these files should only be used to create empty directories; otherwise,
directories are automatically created by debhelper once you install a
file in them
– you could bump Standards-Version to 4.3.0 (that has just been
released)
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀
llocations: 160 bytes)
> dgemm Error :2.770610675980814e-11
> dgemm /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libmkl_rt.so
> 1.103356 seconds (10 allocations: 160 bytes)
> dgemm Error :2.7982744719588258e-11
>
> Netlib is always the slowest one. For small matrices OpenBLAS is
> ver
ributing such an binary and therefore violating the GPL. So at the very
least we must clearly warn the user about that risk and not have MKL the
default BLAS implementation.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
stinst.in, when the users reply "no", you put both BLAS and LAPACK
alternatives in auto mode if MKL was selected for BLAS. You should rather split
that in two tests: one for BLAS, one for LAPACK, because in theory it's
possible to have BLAS pointing to MKL and not LAPACK.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
ifit our
> users (especially the scientific users).
> So here is the package.
As said on debian-science@, the current handling of alternatives within the
postinst script needs to be improved:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-science/2018/04/msg00096.html
https://lists.debian.org/debian-scien
Also, there is a GPG key under debian/upstream/signing-key.asc, but I see no
signature on upstream website (https://common-lisp.net/project/asdf/archives/).
Am I missing something? Or should the key be removed?
Thanks,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http
ile a RFS bug, I email the
> pkg-common-lisp-devel list only.
Since this is a package maintained by the Debian Common Lisp Team, you should
indeed write first to the list of the team, asking for sponsorship. If the team
is alive, that should work. RFS should only be considered as a very last reso
about this package.
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
in
the Maintainer field, no need to repeat it)
- add fields Vcs-Git and Vcs-Browser in debian/control; by the way, the
repository should be name freedict.git, like the source package (without
the prepending pkg-)
--
.''`.Sébastien Villemot
: :' :Debian Developer
`. `' http://www.dynare.org/sebastien
being able to create the repository.
- remove the obsolete README.source
Don't hesitate to ask if you need help on any of these points.
Best,
--
.''`.Sébastien Villemot
: :' :Debian Developer
`. `' http://www.dynare.org/sebastien
`- GPG Key: 4096R/381A7594
signature.asc
13 matches
Mail list logo
