Re: Seeking a small group to package Apache Arrow (was: Bug#970021: RFP: apache-arrow -- cross-language development platform for in-memory analytics)

On 9 April 2024 at 18:45, Jose Manuel Abuin Mosquera wrote: | If possible, I would like to contribute. At work we use the Go and | Python implementations, also, in the short term, we will start using the | Rust one. Similar for us, and we have seen plenty of build headaches across pypi or

Re: Seeking a small group to package Apache Arrow (was: Bug#970021: RFP: apache-arrow -- cross-language development platform for in-memory analytics)

Julian, Arrow is a complicated and large package. We use it at work (where there is a fair amount of Python, also to Conda etc) and do have issues with more complex builds especially because it is 'data infrastructure' and can come in from different parts. I would recommend against packaging at

Re: Advent calendar bug squashing issue (Was: Bug#936609: cblas / gsl hint needed (Was: Bug#936609: Ported ghmm to Python3 but issues with clapack))

On 5 December 2020 at 12:09, Andreas Tille wrote: | this issue is something for our advent calendar. Anybody with cblas | knowledge? I am the GNU GSL maintainer, and I at one point also worked a lot with the Atlas and other LAPACK/BLAS packages. I think Mo may be wrong here: I did the same

Re: RFC: Changing the debian system default BLAS/LAPACK implementation

Mo, Generally in favour as I usually opt for faster OpenBLAS as defaults as well. But allow me to mention one cautionary tale that is very current. Besides the Debian work, I am also upstream for a few R packages. One or two have reasonably become popular and widely ysed, and I run what we

Re: OpenBlas Pthread issue with R

PTIONS) | > | > USE_SIMPLE_THREADED_LEVEL3=1 | > USE_TLS=0 Nice. That sounds promising. | > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 11:22:32PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > > But not to take this away from the key aspect: | > > | > > - on some platforms

Re: OpenBlas Pthread issue with R

ning new schemes that are yet to be tested. Best, Dirk | On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 11:09:57AM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > Hi Seb, | > | > On 1 May 2020 at 14:18, Sébastien Villemot wrote: | > | Le vendredi 01 mai 2020 à 07:05 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel a écrit : | > |

Re: OpenBlas Pthread issue with R

Hi Seb, On 1 May 2020 at 14:18, Sébastien Villemot wrote: | Le vendredi 01 mai 2020 à 07:05 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel a écrit : | > On 1 May 2020 at 05:16, Mo Zhou wrote: | > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 11:26:23PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > > > Switching to libopen

Re: RFC: threading-aware virtual BLAS/LAPACK

On 20 May 2020 at 15:09, Mo Zhou wrote: | @Edd, does it look like a decent solution for the threading trouble of R-4.0.0? "Maybe". We still don't have a fully reproducible bug report as the openmp-pthread issue appears to be specific to the cpu used. Dirk -- http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com |

Re: OpenBlas Pthread issue with R

On 1 May 2020 at 05:16, Mo Zhou wrote: | On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 11:26:23PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > Switching to libopenblas0-openmp works but one needs to uninstall | > libopenblas0-pthread (or else fiddle with the alternatives priority). | | Does that mean the update-altern

Re: OpenBlas Pthread issue with R

On 30 April 2020 at 18:16, Sébastien Villemot wrote: | Le jeudi 30 avril 2020 à 10:43 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel a écrit : | > On the r-sig-debian list (hosted by the R Project for users of R on Debian | > and Ubuntu) someone pointed out that R hangs on simple calls into OpenBLAS | > Pth

OpenBlas Pthread issue with R

On the r-sig-debian list (hosted by the R Project for users of R on Debian and Ubuntu) someone pointed out that R hangs on simple calls into OpenBLAS Pthread, i.e. /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/openblas-pthread/libblas.so.3 To witness, just launch R and issue the example(solve) which spends two

Re: blas wreckage ?

On 7 January 2019 at 12:24, Sébastien Villemot wrote: | Le lundi 07 janvier 2019 à 11:53 +0100, Jörg-Volker Peetz a écrit : | | > running the appended little script on my system a lot of packages are found | > which contain libraries linked to libopenblas.so.0. But all these packages don't | >

Re: State of shiny-server packaging

On 16 September 2018 at 18:57, Philip Rinn wrote: | the packaging effort for shiny-server stalled some month ago. I totally lost | interest in packaging it as I now use shinyproxy[1] at $work. | | As we are heading towards the freeze, I think it's time to discuss how to proceed. | Getting

Re: Re: Bits about Intel MKL packaging -- Higher Priority than OpenBLAS

On 2 May 2018 at 14:41, Lumin wrote: | Seems that things are getting more complicated. Recall that here we'are | going to prevent users from GPL violation in situations such as this | one: | | debootstrap; apt install libmkl-rt; apt install octave; octave ... (1) Are you sure? I do not think

Re: Bits about Intel MKL packaging -- Higher Priority than OpenBLAS

On 28 April 2018 at 21:50, Sébastien Villemot wrote: | These priorities are meant to express what Debian thinks is the best option to | implement BLAS. This thread shows that statement to be incorrect. It appears evenly split -- (I didn't count, but roughly) three people on each side, so a tie.

Re: Bits about Intel MKL packaging -- Higher Priority than OpenBLAS

On 28 April 2018 at 11:56, Dima Kogan wrote: | Andreas Tille writes: | | > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 06:36:51PM +0200, S�bastien Villemot wrote: | > | >> There is also a licensing issue: using GPL'd software (e.g. GNU | >> Octave) with MKL is not allowed. | > | > I think that's

Re: Bits about Intel MKL packaging -- Higher Priority than OpenBLAS

I agree with Lumin here and not Seb -- if and when one adds MKL, it should also be higher priority. That is the point of such a package (which will likely linger in contrib or non-free anyway). FWIW rather recently I put together a simpler script (not a package). Blog post here:

Re: r-cran-git2r uses private header files of libgit2 (Was: Help with libgit2 needed to strip code copy from r-cran-git2r)

I had some friendly emails with Stefan (git2r upstream) when he started the R package git2r (as I needed some features in my drat R package) and he expressed quite some frustration at working with libgit2 as it changed so much upstream. I know we collectively really hate embedding copies, but

Re: Bug#868558: Would you please not upload new r-* packages until transition is finalised (Re: r-api-3.4)

On 12 October 2017 at 16:31, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | On 12 October 2017 at 22:32, Johannes Ranke wrote: | | Am Donnerstag, 12. Oktober 2017, 12:01:14 CEST schrieb Dirk Eddelbuettel: | | | | > So we did this 71 times, but stopped 4+ years ago. Not sure what got the | | > toolchain co

Re: Bug#868558: Would you please not upload new r-* packages until transition is finalised (Re: r-api-3.4)

On 12 October 2017 at 17:45, Graham Inggs wrote: | Hi Dirk | | On 12/10/2017 16:37, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > And yes, the hint re 3.5 being shaky leads itself to uploading to experimental. | | Would you please consider versioning such uploads as 3.5~something | instead of 3.4.someth

Re: Bug#868558: Would you please not upload new r-* packages until transition is finalised (Re: r-api-3.4)

On 12 October 2017 at 16:18, Sébastien Villemot wrote: | On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 09:13:54AM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > On 12 October 2017 at 15:58, Sébastien Villemot wrote: | > | Thanks Charles for explaining this. | > | | > | Actually the migration has already h

Re: Bug#868558: Would you please not upload new r-* packages until transition is finalised (Re: r-api-3.4)

On 12 October 2017 at 15:58, Sébastien Villemot wrote: | Thanks Charles for explaining this. | | Actually the migration has already happened, thanks to the Release Team that | took appropriate action to mitigate the impact of the most recent uploads. | | This will soon be reflected in the

Re: Would you please not upload new r-* packages until transition is finalised (Re: r-api-3.4)

On 12 October 2017 at 14:26, Andreas Tille wrote: | On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 07:06:33AM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > On 12 October 2017 at 11:36, Andreas Tille wrote: | > | yesterday you uploaded | > | | > | r-cran-rcpparmadillo 0.8.100.1.0-1 | > | | &

Would you please not upload new r-* packages until transition is finalised (Re: r-api-3.4)

transition at all. Dirk | it would be helpful if you would not upload r-* packages as long as the | testing migration has not happened. | | Thank you | | Andreas. | | On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 11:58:20AM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > See below for upcoming R 3.4.2 "pre-rele

Re: r-api-3.4 (Was: Upcoming new round of R package rebuilds [FWD: [Rd] R-devel) object header changes that require reinstalling packages]

On 24 September 2017 at 22:20, Charles Plessy wrote: | Le Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 11:58:20AM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel a écrit : | > | > May I assume that some of you who sp tiredlessly argued for it will now liase | > with the release team to get 500+ forcefully rebuilt? | |

Re: r-api-3.4 (Was: Upcoming new round of R package rebuilds [FWD: [Rd] R-devel) object header changes that require reinstalling packages]

On 24 September 2017 at 13:37, Andreas Tille wrote: | On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 11:58:20AM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > r-base (3.4.1.20170921-1) unstable; urgency=medium | | > * Initial rc build (r73337) of R 3.4.2 expected f

Re: Any idea why r-base-3 has vanished this morning? (Was: r-api-3.4 (Was: Upcoming new round of R package rebuilds))

On 24 September 2017 at 09:39, Andreas Tille wrote: | On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 11:58:20AM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > See below for upcoming R 3.4.2 "pre-release" change. | | Hmmm, I wonder why I get after todays upgrade of my pbuilder environment | I ge

Re: Upcoming new round of R package rebuilds [FWD: [Rd] R-devel object header changes that require reinstalling packages]

On 19 September 2017 at 14:15, Johannes Ranke wrote: | > But you escalated it | | Mhm. I reported a bug with severity "normal". Maybe the language I used was | too dramatic? The whole bug report was, pardon my French, complete and utter nonsense. The folks who needed to know already knew. But

Re: Upcoming new round of R package rebuilds [FWD: [Rd] R-devel object header changes that require reinstalling packages]

On 19 September 2017 at 11:07, Johannes Ranke wrote: | Am Montag, 18. September 2017, 10:39:02 CEST schrieb Dirk Eddelbuettel: | > Common knowledge. I referenced it half-a-dozen times in the damned thread | > about the binNMUs. | | This (https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=

Re: Upcoming new round of R package rebuilds [FWD: [Rd] R-devel object header changes that require reinstalling packages]

On 18 September 2017 at 22:41, Charles Plessy wrote: | Hello everybody, | | I just wanted to relay the information that some R packages will need a | rebuild after the next upgrade of R. (see the email forwarded below.) Common knowledge. I referenced it half-a-dozen times in the damned thread

Re: Why does r-cran-rcppgsl not migrate to testing?

On 8 September 2017 at 22:47, Andreas Tille wrote: | Hi Dirk, | | On Thu, Sep 07, 2017 at 02:46:04PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > On 7 September 2017 at 21:20, Andreas Tille wrote: | > | Hi Dirk, | > | | > | On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 04:22:33PM -0500, Dirk Edd

Re: Why does r-cran-rcppgsl not migrate to testing?

Hi Andreas, On 7 September 2017 at 21:20, Andreas Tille wrote: | Hi Dirk, | | On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 04:22:33PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > On 6 September 2017 at 22:48, Andreas Tille wrote: | > | [Chris, I took the freedom to move r-cran-mcmc to Debian Science | > | team si

Re: Why does r-cran-rcppgsl not migrate to testing?

On 6 September 2017 at 22:48, Andreas Tille wrote: | [Chris, I took the freedom to move r-cran-mcmc to Debian Science | team since I had the impression that this would generally OK for | you.] | | Hi Dirk, | | On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 10:17:04AM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote

Re: Why does r-cran-rcppgsl not migrate to testing?

On 6 September 2017 at 16:49, Andreas Tille wrote: | On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 07:37:07AM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > I can actually no longer replicate the original issue | > | > https://bugs.debian.org/861333 | > | > with any of the few (40-some now) packages

Re: Why does r-cran-rcppgsl not migrate to testing?

On 6 September 2017 at 15:12, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: | On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 07:37:07AM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > It is a trivial "monstly non-bug" bug report. But the release team won't act, | > so I am now resigned to waiting. I explained the case in

Re: Why does r-cran-rcppgsl not migrate to testing?

Andreas, Mail CC'ed to debian-science goes into the debian-science folder which I don't regularly open, so sorry for the delay. If in doubt or if I don't reply please email (or DM) me directly, On 2 September 2017 at 16:17, Andreas Tille wrote: | according to | |

Re: Bug#862039: r-bioc-gviz: accesses the internet during build

On 9 May 2017 at 14:57, Andreas Tille wrote: | Hi Chris, | | On Sun, May 07, 2017 at 06:06:10PM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote: | > | > Whilst r-bioc-gviz builds successfully on unstable/amd64, according to | > Debian Policy 4.9 packages may not attempt network access during | > a build. | > | >

Re: Status of dh-r and problems building r-cran-yaml

On 5 December 2016 at 17:57, Gordon Ball wrote: | On 01/12/16 09:46, Andreas Tille wrote: | > However, yesterday I stumbled upon r-cran-yaml[1] which causes a problem | > I was not able to solve quickly. Upstream has injected an additional | > declaration to the code copy of libyaml which I

Re: ITP: r-cran-bh -- GNU R package with Boost headers

On 3 December 2016 at 08:51, Andreas Tille wrote: | Hi Dirk, | | I just realised that this ITP seems not to be closes. I somehow forgot | this since the former requirement I had for this package seems to have | vanished. However, my attempt to upgrade r-cran-rsqlite to its latest | upstream

Re: statistics: who maintains R packages in Debian (was: Re: Debhelper for R packages)

On 18 October 2016 at 18:28, Andreas Tille wrote: | On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 06:27:13PM +0300, Michael Crusoe wrote: | > > > r-other-hms-dbmi-spp | > > > | > > > It is _a lot_ easier for all of us if we only have top-level | > > > | > > > r-cran-* | > > > r-bioc-* | > > > r-other-*

Re: statistics: who maintains R packages in Debian (was: Re: Debhelper for R packages)

. That is almost as bad your top-reply ;-) Dirk | On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 06:58:15AM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > Shouldn't the new package | > | > r-hms-dbmi-spp | > | > been renamed | > | > r-other-$author-$package | > | > ie | &

Re: statistics: who maintains R packages in Debian (was: Re: Debhelper for R packages)

Shouldn't the new package r-hms-dbmi-spp been renamed r-other-$author-$package ie r-other-hms-dbmi-spp It is _a lot_ easier for all of us if we only have top-level r-cran-* r-bioc-* r-other-* Dirk -- http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org

statistics: who maintains R packages in Debian (was: Re: Debhelper for R packages)

On 8 October 2016 at 20:32, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote: | On Sat, Oct 08, 2016 at 12:08:50PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > On 8 October 2016 at 17:45, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote: | > | Otoh: currently R stuff is mainly maintained within debian-science and | > | debian-med. | &g

Re: Debhelper for R packages

On 8 October 2016 at 20:01, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote: | I couldn't agree more. I'm a cdbs fan, and some of my packages I maintain with | neither cdbs nor dh. So I was _very_ happy to find out cdbs was the tool used | by many r-cran packages, when I started packaging r-cran stuff. Don't get

Re: Debhelper for R packages

On 7 October 2016 at 22:24, Dylan wrote: | 2016-10-07 16:25 GMT+02:00 Gordon Ball <gor...@chronitis.net>: | > On 07/10/16 15:33, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | >> | >> On 7 October 2016 at 15:09, Andreas Tille wrote: | >> | I'm fine with these changes. If you want t

Re: Debhelper for R packages

On 8 October 2016 at 17:45, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote: | Otoh: currently R stuff is mainly maintained within debian-science and debian-med. Well: the R package itself, addons like ess, rpy2, rkward, ... , and several dozen r-cran-packages maintained are not. Dirk --

Re: Debhelper for R packages

On 7 October 2016 at 15:09, Andreas Tille wrote: | I'm fine with these changes. If you want to let this propagate to all | R+BioConductor packages probably a lintian warning makes sense. May be Really? We don't have an officially sanctioned policy that _mandates_ this. We are about giving

Re: Debhelper for R packages

On 9 September 2016 at 15:14, Gordon Ball wrote: | On 09/09/16 14:17, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | The plan was to avoid seeing eg, lintian hardening-no-bindnow warnings | > | on packages with compiled extensions. I tried injecting dpkg-buildflags | > | LDFLAGS output into the

Re: Debhelper for R packages

(chopping down a little to shorten) On 9 September 2016 at 10:50, Gordon Ball wrote: | On 08/09/16 23:25, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > Our Depends also need to cover R's "Imports:" which we will not see via ldd. I | > presume you have that covered, I just thought I'd ment

Re: Debhelper for R packages

On 8 September 2016 at 16:49, Don Armstrong wrote: | On Thu, 08 Sep 2016, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > On 8 September 2016 at 22:37, Andreas Tille wrote: | > To me github is as good / preferable. Other DDs have no issue developing via | > GH. I'd maybe make alioth another remote

Re: Debhelper for R packages

Gordon, Andreas, On 8 September 2016 at 22:37, Andreas Tille wrote: | R is not team maintained and Dirk is not reading all threads on Debian | Science - make sure you CC him (as I did) if you want to be sure he | notices your mail. Well ... procmail still sticks it into the same folder and I

Re: What's the difference between CRAN Cairo and cairoDevice

Hi Andreas, [ Lucky I found this -- procmail sticks this into the debian-science folder which I do not visit as often as my normal inbox ... ] On 18 August 2016 at 08:52, Andreas Tille wrote: | Hi Dirk, | | I've got a request to install Cairo[1] which from the description sounds | pretty

Re: Need help with upgrading R package which verifies that the dir it builds in matches its name (r-bioc-tracklayer)

On 9 May 2016 at 21:10, Andreas Tille wrote: | > Or rather, I take the 'self-directory' | > test out in 3.2. | | You probably mean 3.3, right? Version 3.2 has no such test as far as I | can see. Sorry, meant whichever version (of rtracklayer) gave you that issue. I would rather not remove

Re: Need help with upgrading R package which verifies that the dir it builds in matches its name (r-bioc-tracklayer)

On 9 May 2016 at 20:37, Andreas Tille wrote: | Hi again, | | I solved this by simply removing the whole configure script in a quilt patch. That sounds crazy so I took a look. BioConductor just had a 3.3 release (matching the R release cycle) and they seemingly simplified it a lot. Compare

Re: R package CI test failures

On 3 May 2016 at 22:53, Andreas Tille wrote: | If we do not receive any hint from upstream removing this test seems to [...] | Hoping for upstream to respond to my first mail. I might ping at [...] | I might ping upstream. [...] They won't know what you are talking about, and for a reason. The

Re: Bug#819343: ITP: r-cran-dplyr -- A Grammar of Data Manipulation for GNU R

On 30 March 2016 at 13:34, Andreas Tille wrote: | On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 06:21:55AM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > | I talked about this with Dirk[1] and may be I should have done this for | > | the moment as well. Meanwhile Dirk has ITPed r-cran-bh (#819389) and | > |

Re: Bug#819343: ITP: r-cran-dplyr -- A Grammar of Data Manipulation for GNU R

On 29 March 2016 at 08:28, Andreas Tille wrote: | Hi Chris, | | On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 08:45:41PM -0400, Chris Lawrence wrote: | > On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Andreas Tille wrote: | > > Thanks for this ITP since it is also on my list of needed packages for | > >

Re: copyright issues on debian

On 12 October 2015 at 17:29, Drew Parsons wrote: [...] | argument, the question is whether GPL licenced software is allowed to | link against GPL-licenced software. Well put. | When you read it that way, it might make it easier to understand why | people aren't so worried about the violation.

Re: packaging an alternative R

On 28 September 2015 at 13:15, Jonathon Love wrote: | essentially, JASP depends on package A. package A gets updated in a way | that breaks compatibility with us (this has happened to us with three | different R packages making breaking changes between releases in the | last couple of years,

Re: packaging an alternative R

Also: http://debian-r.debian.net tends to have current packages. You could (programmatically !!) compare the state of required CRAN packages within Debian (my very small RcppAPT package on CRAN interfaces apt), compare to what available.packages() in R says and maybe warn on discrepancy. Dirk

Re: packaging an alternate R engine

[ Suggestion: s/parallel/alternate/ as "parallel" has some other connotation in the context of computing / programming with data. ] On 25 September 2015 at 14:35, Jonathon Love wrote: | hi, | | i'm wanting to create a deb package for a parallel R installation. | | the software i'm working

Re: Bug#617296: RFP: rstudio -- IDE for GNU R

FWIW I am very good and close friends with the RStudio founders and several of their engineers. But most (power R) users I know (myself included) happily use their dailies from http://www.rstudio.org/download/daily/ It would be a lot of work to get (and keep) this packaged as RStudio found over

Re: r-cran-rinside good to go

On 2 September 2015 at 17:26, Andreas Tille wrote: | Hi Jonathon, | | On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 03:09:59PM +0200, Jonathon Love wrote: | > > | > > I would have loved if the patch would have been discussed - IMHO it is | > > sensible. | > | > oh ok. still figuring out how much autonomy i'm

Re: r-cran-rinside good to go

On 2 September 2015 at 15:09, Jonathon Love wrote: | fixed now. a lot of these R packages don't do you any favours coming up | with a < 80 char description. Simply a different (if related in spirit and scope) spec -- R itself has rather stringent checks in 'R CMD check ...' which, not unlike

Re: Bug#761364: ITP: abc -- A System for Sequential Synthesis and Verification

On 15 September 2014 at 17:33, Andreas Tille wrote: | On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 11:38:48AM +0200, ruben.undh...@gmail.com wrote: | Please provide feedback on the naming of the package! | Perhaps the name abc is a bad name to use in debian although | it's the correct upstream name. | | I admit I

Re: Bug#737533: ITP: r-cran-rnetcdf -- GNU R package that provides an R Interface to NetCDF Datasets

| with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org | Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140205132020.ge26...@an3as.eu | -- Dirk Eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-science-requ...@lists.debian.org

Re: Bug#737533: ITP: r-cran-rnetcdf -- GNU R package that provides an R Interface to NetCDF Datasets

On 5 February 2014 at 19:19, Sebastian Gibb wrote: | On Wednesday 05 February 2014 14:37:00 Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | Also, there are three packages on CRAN interfacing the NetCDF library: | |RNetCDF |ncdf4 |ncdf | | I never know which one is maintained and good

Re: packaging stan

to store/cache compiled modules for their use. That said, I know next to nothing about (R)Stan internals and builds. I am not an (R)Stan user myself. Dirk -- Dirk Eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-science-requ...@lists.debian.org

Re: Stupid fumble with bug numbers

...@lists.debian.org | Archive: http://lists.debian.org/514576fe.50...@laposte.net | -- Dirk Eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-science-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Bug#690544: ITP: xts -- GNU R package for time series analysis

[Press RETURN to save to a file] -- Dirk Eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-science-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org

Julia language in Debian ?

Doug Bates pointed me to this the other day: http://julialang.org/ which will redirect to github at https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia Looks promising, is open source (mostly MIT license) and pretty fast. Anybody have spare time / bandwidth to think about packaging it? Dirk -- Outside

Re: OpenMPI-bin missing on some arches (Was: mrbayes-mpi: uninstallable on mipsen and s390)

On 29 June 2011 at 15:01, Andreas Tille wrote: | Hi, | | Your package is uninstallable on some archs: | | mrbayes-mpi/mips unsatisfiable Depends: openmpi-bin | mrbayes-mpi/mipsel unsatisfiable Depends: openmpi-bin | mrbayes-mpi/s390 unsatisfiable Depends: openmpi-bin | | I admit

Re: OpenMPI-bin missing on some arches (Was: mrbayes-mpi: uninstallable on mipsen and s390)

On 29 June 2011 at 08:30, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | On 29 June 2011 at 15:01, Andreas Tille wrote: | | Hi, | | | | Your package is uninstallable on some archs: | | | | mrbayes-mpi/mips unsatisfiable Depends: openmpi-bin | | mrbayes-mpi/mipsel unsatisfiable Depends: openmpi-bin

Re: Bug#589685: KDE 3's libs removal ping

' are not feature-by-feature substitutes. Not sure if it worth dealing with /etc/alternatives/ though. Dirk -- Dirk Eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-science-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact

Re: How to properly integrate cran2deb into Debian?

On 18 February 2011 at 13:10, Manuel Prinz wrote: | On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 11:08:20AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: | probably not the right list, debian-science list comes rather to mind | because Dirk Eddelbuettel (in CC) is also reading there. So please move | to this list in case you want

Re: [R-sig-hpc] License of GotoBLAS was changed to BSD

at TACC and all that. Sylvestre, any interest and equally importantly, spare cycles on your part? Cheers, Dirk -- Dirk Eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-science-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble

Re: [R-sig-hpc] License of GotoBLAS was changed to BSD

Salut Sylvestre! Thanks for the superspeedy follow-up! On 26 November 2010 at 18:00, Sylvestre Ledru wrote: | Le vendredi 26 novembre 2010 à 10:53 -0600, Dirk Eddelbuettel a écrit : | Hi science folks, | | Ei-ji, who follows this closely and who also wrote a the very nice | gotoblas2

Re: [R-sig-hpc] License of GotoBLAS was changed to BSD

On 26 November 2010 at 23:10, Thomas Weber wrote: | On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 10:53:09AM -0600, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | Wouldn't we want GotoBLAS2 in Debian now that it is BSD-licensed? | | Uh, are you guys aware of | http://www.tacc.utexas.edu/tacc-projects/gotoblas2/faq/ ? | | GotoBLAS

Re: RFS: r-cran-scatterplot3d

On 24 January 2010 at 18:24, Philip Rinn wrote: | Dear debian-science subscribers, | | I am looking for a sponsor for my package scatterplot3d. | | * Package name: scatterplot3d | Version : 0.3-30-1 | Upstream Author : Uwe Ligges | * URL :

Bug#560347: RFP: ncl -- Nexus Class Library

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist * Package name: ncl (Nexus Class Library) Version : 2.1.08 (dated 2009-11-30) Upstream Author : Paul O. Lewis * URL or Web page : http://hydrodictyon.eeb.uconn.edu/ncl/ * License : GPL-2 Description : Nexus Class Library The NEXUS

Torque in Debian?

I seem to recall that someone once mentioned packaging of Morten's Torque packages from Ubuntu. I also seem to recall Steffen saying that he was in contact with Morten. Based on quick search of my mail folder I can't find traces of either. Could someone kindly refresh my memory? [ Google sees

Re: tasks overview wishlist: Canonical citing reference

Hi Morten, On 4 November 2009 at 16:18, Morten Kjeldgaard wrote: | Charles Plessy wrote: | | In the discussion that followed, we talked about where to store this | information, and in which format, since adding more content to the | debian/control file is not an easy thing (it ‘costs’ a lot

Rebuilding all 100+ r-cran-* packages for R 2.10.0

R 2.10.0, due out October 26, will switch to an internal html converter from the latex-alike Rd format coupled with an internal webserver. See below for the section on 'Significant user-visible changes' in the NEWS file from 2.10.0 -- taken from the Oct 13 beta currently in unstable. This means

Re: Rebuilding all 100+ r-cran-* packages for R 2.10.0

On 17 October 2009 at 01:29, Cyril Brulebois wrote: | Dirk Eddelbuettel e...@debian.org (16/10/2009): | This means we should rebuild all packages or else they will upon | load trigger a nagging message 'package foo was built under R | version x.y.z and may not function properly' as well

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] cran2deb: 1700+ new Debian / R packages

On 24 July 2009 at 12:53, Andreas Tille wrote: | On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 04:19:25PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | The other unspoken point: no, I do not intend to submit 1700 packages to | Debian's NEW queue. It would take a lot more effort to properly manually | maintain these at full

Re: simple batch queue system?

On 22 July 2009 at 16:32, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: | On 22/07/09 at 12:30 +0200, Teemu Ikonen wrote: | Hi Debian scientists, | | I'm in the market for a simple job scheduler for a set of work nodes | in the 'cloud' (i.e. EC2). A queue for submitted non-parallel jobs, | commands to insert and

Re: [R-sig-Debian] [ANNOUNCEMENT] cran2deb: 1700+ new Debian / R packages

Hi Michael, On 14 July 2009 at 18:44, charles blundell wrote: | 2009/7/13 Michael Rutter ma...@psu.edu | 1. Are there any negatives going from an install.packages(foo) | approach using R then switching to an apt-get install r-cran-foo | method of installing packages? If I install a deb

[ANNOUNCEMENT] cran2deb: 1700+ new Debian / R packages

Announcing cran2deb: 1700+ Debian packages from almost all of CRAN -- Last Friday's presentation at UseR! 2009 was the first really public mention of 'cran2deb'. It provides Debian packages of all of CRAN. It started as Charles'

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] cran2deb: 1700+ new Debian / R packages

Hi Don, That was a quick follow-up :) On 13 July 2009 at 14:02, Don Armstrong wrote: | On Mon, 13 Jul 2009, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | We currently build for the testing distribution and the i386 and | amd64 architectures. This is now publically useable and we welcome | wider testing

Re: How about packaging a Java GUI for R?

On 1 July 2009 at 20:14, Charles Plessy wrote: | I have found today a nice R GUI written in Java, JGR (speak 'Jaguar'). | http://jgr.markushelbig.org/JGR.html Yes -- I had of course been aware of it for years and had versions on my box. JGR had won a software price in the R world when Simon (a

Re: MPICH2 packaging

On 16 June 2009 at 10:06, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: | On 15/06/09 at 18:32 -0400, Adam C Powell IV wrote: | Hello Pavan, | | Thank you for the inquiry. I've somewhat left MPICH for now (focusing | on OpenMPI, which I don't maintain but use), and assigned its | maintenance to the Debian

Re: Bug#522017: ITP: jblas -- jblas is a fast linear algebra library for Java

On 3 April 2009 at 07:51, Sylvestre Ledru wrote: | Le vendredi 03 avril 2009 01:24 +0200, Matthias Klose a crit : | Chris Walker schrieb: | Soeren Sonnenburg so...@debian.org writes: | | Package: wnpp | Severity: wishlist | Owner: Soeren Sonnenburg so...@debian.org | | *

Re: [Pkg-openmpi-maintainers] building package with different libs

On 18 November 2008 at 23:03, Adam C Powell IV wrote: | All things considered, OpenMPI has my vote as the most advanced | implementation right now... Thanks for that. Given that we need to order these (presented alphabetically) LAM ? MPICH ? Open MPI I suggest the following: i) LAM

Re: building package with different libs

On 14 November 2008 at 23:12, Steve M. Robbins wrote: | Howdy, | | | On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 07:48:19PM -0400, Adam C Powell IV wrote: | [Copying -beowulf as there's likely some interest there as well.] | | On Thu, 2008-10-30 at 15:21 +0100, Manuel Prinz wrote: | | When building against

Re: tasks overview wishlist: Canonical citing reference

On 11 October 2008 at 15:40, Chris Walker wrote: | I do like the approach of having a simple plain text file - while not | machine readable does make it clear the appropriate citation - (and in FWIW that is was R does. For the subset of CRAN package I maintain, here is the subset having such a

Re: future of blas/lapack/atlas packages?

(Doku and Camm re-added to CC --Dirk) On 8 July 2008 at 16:02, Ondrej Certik wrote: | Hi, | | thanks Matthias for raising this issue. Seconded! This has always been a point of great pride for Debian, and I have provided Atlas to users of R and Octave (when I still maintained the latter)

Re: About free-form database

This is a debian-user question. Learn to use 'apt-cache search' -- there must be at least a hundred packages in Debian for what you describe, from note taking to mind mappming to personal wikis. Don't abuse debian-science because you think of yourself as a scientist. Dirk -- Three out of two

Re: [Pkg-corba-devel] OpenCASCADE and Salomé

On 6 March 2008 at 09:28, Adam C Powell IV wrote: | On Wed, 2008-03-05 at 23:29 +0100, Thomas Girard wrote: | Hello Adam, | | Le mercredi 05 mars 2008 à 07:34 -0500, Adam C Powell IV a écrit : | I'm not getting this error... I don't know why you would have seen that | MPI error, I'd

Re: open source image matching software

On 6 February 2008 at 19:11, Paul E Condon wrote: | I have a large number of scanned images of photographs. They are | scanned from prints, and for some images there are several prints. I | would like to find a program that would group similar images (similar | in some sense that approximates

Re: Science group on alioth

On 24 January 2008 at 22:02, Christophe Prud'homme wrote: | The policy is not to include the sources, just the diff. Would that be ok ? | We use svn-buildpackage but that is not mandatory Same for us at pkg-openmpi. I wasn't the one setting this up, but as the default 'sponsor and uploader' I

  1   2   >