Le lundi 11 mars 2024 à 15:47 +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> 1. Verify the list of packages whether you want to keep on working
> on this/these package(s) (and if you have different e-mail
> addresses please stick to only one)
> Sébastien Villemot :
> r-cran-bdsm
o remove ATLAS. I opened a merge
request that seems to do the job:
https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/phast/-/merge_requests/1
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ https://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Control: tags -1 + patch
Hi Andreas,
Le mercredi 29 novembre 2023 à 10:06 +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> Control: tags -1 help
>
> Am Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 01:40:22AM +0200 schrieb Sébastien Villemot:
> > Le lundi 10 juillet 2023 à 22:01 +0200, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> &
Le dimanche 05 novembre 2023 à 14:02 +0100, Sébastien Villemot a
écrit :
> Le samedi 08 juillet 2023 à 10:01 +0200, Sébastien Villemot a écrit :
> > As the maintainer of the atlas package over the last decade, I now
> > wonder whether we should remove it from the archive.
>
&
the last fallback when none of the others are available.
> This seems missing from the message draft.
It is not necessary to mention libblas3 in Recommends because the
Depends field normally already includes libblas.so.3 | libblas3.
Hence libblas3 is already the last fallback.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
Le samedi 08 juillet 2023 à 10:01 +0200, Sébastien Villemot a écrit :
> As the maintainer of the atlas package over the last decade, I now
> wonder whether we should remove it from the archive.
Since the present thread seems to indicate that there to be a consensus
towards removing atla
Le mercredi 12 juillet 2023 à 15:34 +0200, Rafael Laboissière a écrit :
> * Sébastien Villemot [2023-07-08 10:01]:
>
> > As the maintainer of the atlas package over the last decade, I now
> > wonder whether we should remove it from the archive.
[…]
> Thanks for sta
k.so only includes the
Fortran routines, while the C interface is provided by the separate
liblapacke.so). You can check this for yourself by running the
following commands:
$ objdump -T /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libblas.so
$ objdump -T /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libcblas.so
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Vil
Le lundi 10 juillet 2023 à 22:01 +0200, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> Hi Sébastian,
>
> Am Sat, Jul 08, 2023 at 10:01:15AM +0200 schrieb Sébastien Villemot:
> >
> > So, given all that, I’m inclined to (try to) remove atlas during the
> > trixie development cycle.
>
&g
/DebianScience/LinearAlgebraLibraries
² https://github.com/math-atlas/math-atlas/
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ https://www.debian.org
sebastien@coccia:~$ dak rm -nR atlas
Will remove the following packages from unstable
says otherwise).
I would be interested in hearing the opinion from others on this list
who have more experience with this issue.
Best wishes,
¹
https://github.com/DrTimothyAldenDavis/SuiteSparse/issues/177#issuecomment-1374828162
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://
lds against
> > GraphBLAS, so this should not break stuff. What do you think?
> I agree with you. Recommends is probably enough.
I’ve added the Recommends in suitesparse 1:5.10.1+dfsg-4.
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://sebastien.vi
o package currently builds against
GraphBLAS, so this should not break stuff. What do you think?
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ https://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
ply to this email.
> >
> > [1]: https://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html
> > or https://ftp-master.debian.org/backports-new.html for *-backports
>
>
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ https://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Le samedi 02 octobre 2021 à 14:06 +0200, Vincent Prat a écrit :
> Le 02/10/2021 à 13:17, Sébastien Villemot a écrit :
> > Le samedi 02 octobre 2021 à 11:06 +0200, Vincent Prat a écrit :
> > > Le 27/09/2021 à 17:26, Sébastien Villemot a écrit :
> > > > Le samedi 2
Le samedi 02 octobre 2021 à 11:06 +0200, Vincent Prat a écrit :
> Le 27/09/2021 à 17:26, Sébastien Villemot a écrit :
> >
> > Le samedi 25 septembre 2021 à 17:57 +0200, Vincent Prat a écrit :
> > > I recently started packaging python-suitesparse-graphblas [1], which i
ersion, and to only add the epoch on the libgraphblas5 binary package
(this is technically possible, see e.g. gcc-defaults).
And when libgraphblas bumps its SOVERSION (whichs happens quite
frequently), then you will be able to drop the epoch and revert to a
standard versioning scheme.
--
nking, since that alternative also governs libblas.a. But we don’t
use static linking much in Debian. And for someone who is doing static
linking, the libblas.so.3 alternative is irrelevant anyways, so there
is no risk of confusion.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ ht
than to have octave-symbolic. But if you
have an idea how to fix the problem and have both in bullseye, that
would be great.
Best,
¹ https://bugs.debian.org/980707
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ https://www.debian.org
Mo above. Can one of you
open that bug, so that we can move the discussion there?
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ https://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
science-team/openblas/-/merge_requests/2
It looks good to me. I’ve merged your changes. You can go ahead with an
upload if you will.
Thanks,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ https://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Le lundi 11 mai 2020 à 21:10 +0200, Sébastien Villemot a écrit :
> Le mardi 12 mai 2020 à 01:48 +0800, Drew Parsons a écrit :
> > 2b) A separate thing to look into is whether the alternative for
> > libblas.so.3 can be slaved on to libblas.so (or vice versa) so they
libblas.so and libblas.so.3 live in
different packages (-dev versus shared library).
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ https://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
applications
compiled against Intel’s OpenMP, and we cannot do anything about that).
So we should rather fix the bug that you encountered.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ https://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
n packages libopenblas0-openmp and
libopenblas0-serial). As a workaround, you can try to install one of
these two (and adjust the BLAS alternatives accordingly).
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ https://www.debian.or
since your package is in the
main component of Debian (and not in contrib or non-free).
Could you give more details about the warning message, and about the
tool that displayed it?
Thanks for your work,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀
ntime switch
> > mechanism
> >to Gentoo (
> > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Blas-lapack-switch
> > )
> > which is to some extent similar to our update-alternatives.
> > 3. currently I co-maintain a portion of blas/lapack packages for
> >both Gentoo and
Hi Lumin,
Le jeudi 31 octobre 2019 à 01:22 +, Mo Zhou a écrit :
> Shall we upload lapack 3.8.0-8
>
> + [ Sébastien Villemot ]
> + * Migrate to Python 3
> ++ python3.patch: new patch
> ++ d/control, d/tests/control: replace python by python3 (Closes: #9
e we have to go through NEW).
Thanks for your work,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
libsundials-dev: broken-symlink
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libsundials_sunnonlinsolfixedpoint.so ->
libsundials_sunnonlinsolfixedpoint.so.1
libsundials-dev: broken-symlink
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libsundials_sunnonlinsolnewton.so ->
libsundials_sunnonlinsolnewton
one know if that's a bug in lintian or gfortran?
What do you mean by “they only explicitly depend on the equivalent C
library”?
In any case, if you’re sure that your binaries don’t require any symbol
from the libc, it’s ok to override the lintian warnings.
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾
Le mercredi 25 septembre 2019 à 19:25 +0200, Sébastien Villemot a écrit :
> Le samedi 21 septembre 2019 à 11:00 +0200, Graham Inggs a écrit :
> > On Sat, 21 Sep 2019 at 07:07, Mo Zhou wrote:
> > > mips64el, s390x, ppc64, sparc64, they are not
> > > typical archi
ad soon. I hope
this will be enough to fix the testsuite on all arches.
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Le mardi 20 août 2019 à 19:29 +0200, Gilles Filippini a écrit :
> Mo Zhou a écrit le 20/08/2019 à 18:21 :
> > On 2019-08-20 16:15, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> > > I realize that I don’t know what we should put in the Architecture
> > > field in debian/control for t
Le mardi 20 août 2019 à 18:11 +0200, Sébastien Villemot a écrit :
> Le mardi 20 août 2019 à 09:00 -0700, Mo Zhou a écrit :
> > Got it. But keep in mind that we haven't adapted the rules/control
> > for 32-bit architectures -- they don't support BLAS64/LAPACK64.
> > I'll add
Le mardi 20 août 2019 à 09:00 -0700, Mo Zhou a écrit :
> On 2019-08-20 15:26, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> > The only change that I’d like you to do now is to add DEP-3 headers
> > to
> > makefile-blas-remove-dep.patch.
>
> The intention of that patch is to remove a mak
in a subsequent upload? That's fine with me, as long as we don't
forget them.
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
n't register LAPACKE in the
>alternatives system?
Yes I think it’s fine. LAPACKE is only a thin C wrapper above LAPACK,
and there is only one implementation of that wrapper. And liblapacke.so
is dynamically linked against liblapack.so, so it will pick whatever
LAPACK implementation is currently selecte
ndexing is just about matrix indexing, not about CPU ISA).
8) The git history is quite messy. I think your branch should be
squashed in a single commit.
Thanks for your work, I think it’ll be a great step forward for t
he OpenBLAS package (once we’ve fixed these issues).
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébast
Le jeudi 25 avril 2019 à 23:46 +0200, Francesco Montanari a écrit :
> Thanks for taking the time to review the package.
I just the upload (after fixing a remaining typo).
Thanks for your contribution,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ h
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
Le lundi 01 avril 2019 à 22:11 +0200, ghisv...@gmail.com a écrit :
> I have just fixed the current RC affecting `python-h5netcdf` with an
> update to its new upstream release.
Uploaded, thanks.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemo
Le dimanche 31 mars 2019 à 12:34 +0200, ghisv...@gmail.com a écrit :
> I forgot to verify that `python-bayespy` had a new upstream release
> during yesterday's BSP session. Could someone sponsor it please?
Uploaded, thanks.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀
y thing left is
> to run `dch --release`, tag and submit.
Uploaded, thanks.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
s to run
> `dch --release` on it and submit.
Uploaded, thanks.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
libopenblas-base is changed into a transitional dummy package.
> It should be removed for Debian 12.
Note that for a similar transition in the past (libblas3gf → libblas3),
the Release Team declined to schedule rebuilds, since it’s not an ABI
change (just a package renaming). Hence we had to wa
n/removal.
> This proposal has been applied to BLIS (>= 0.5.1-8) already.
>
> I believe this version of layout looks far much better.
Thanks. Indeed I also prefer the flat layout.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://seb
astien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄
ased MKL 2019 in late
> 2018).
Sounds good, thanks for the heads up.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Le samedi 09 février 2019 à 15:47 +, PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel a
écrit :
> What about creating a specific profile for this purpose ?
Note that openblas and atlas already use DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=custom for
that purpose (but we could switch to another profile name).
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Ville
likely.
Did you try to reproduce the problem on a pristine sid chroot, or
another system?
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
nd octave runs smoothly.
So I think there is no bug here, only confusing output from ldd.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
default variant (in the case of OpenBLAS, the
pthread one) that would have the highest priority (and that would also
probably be the first alternative in the metapackage dependency).
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Le mardi 18 décembre 2018 à 15:12 +, Mo Zhou a écrit :
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 12:42:22PM +0100, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> > > BTW, what is the "-base" (in libopenblas-base) supposed to mean?
> >
> > I don't even remember what it means, but it is
Le dimanche 30 décembre 2018 à 11:06 +0100, Antonio Valentino a écrit :
> Dear Sébastien,
> thank you for looking at the numexpr package.
>
> Il 30/12/18 09:57, Sébastien Villemot ha scritto:
>
> > Le vendredi 21 décembre 2018 à 08:22 +0100, Antonio Valentino a écr
ere are open-ended copyright years interval
(in the main stanza and in the debian/*). I don't think this makes
sense from the perspective of copyright legislation. You should put
real years there (i.e. close the interval with 2018).
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Devel
in backporting openblas. But if someone
wants to create it and maintain it until stretch is EOL, please go
ahead.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Le dimanche 16 décembre 2018 à 09:34 +, Mo Zhou a écrit :
> On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 09:15:03AM +0100, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> > > src:blis
> > > bin:libblis1 (meta)
> > > deps: libblis1-openmp | libblis1-pthread | libblis1-serial
>
++, asking for the Python 3 package. This will not magically do
the work, but at least the issue will be properly tracked.
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
| libblis1-serial
> provides: libblas.so.3
> bin:libblis64-1 (meta)
> deps: libblis64-1-openmp | ...
> provides: libblas64.so.3
> ...
>
> Note that BLIS doesn't provide LAPACK implementation.
>
> @Sebastian: Does this look good to OpenB
e upload it in debian ?
I have just uploaded rheolef 7.0-2. Thanks for your work.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Le mardi 23 octobre 2018 à 14:12 +, Mo Zhou a écrit :
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 07:58:38PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 07:55:10PM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> > > For BLAS/LAPACK implementations implemented in C, like OpenBLAS, they
>
s64.so.3, SONAME=libblas64.so.3,
> provides=libblas64.so.3-x86_64-linux-gnu)
> bin:libblas64-dev (...)
Adding a "64" suffix to the package name and to the SONAME (compared to
the 32-bit indexing version) sounds good to me.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien V
through the BLAS/LAPACK ABI are affected (most of them
are array indices, the remaining others are return codes).
For BLAS/LAPACK implementations implemented in C, like OpenBLAS, they
will be compiled using LP64, and not ILP64. Only integers exposed
through the interface will be affected, through the
e to ask you, Sébastien, to take a look and, if everything is well,
> build and upload the package. If anything is amiss, please let me know.
I uploaded the package (after fixing a typo in debian/control).
Thanks for your contribution,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Develope
Le dimanche 19 août 2018 à 03:06 +, Lumin a écrit :
> On Sat, Aug 18, 2018 at 07:23:48PM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> Le samedi 18 août 2018 à 15:16 +, Lumin a écrit :
> libtensorflow.so FTBFS with double-conversion 3.0.0 so I need a
> snapshot
> version of do
conversion, so
you should handle this package with care.
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 06:51:02PM -0700, Dima Kogan wrote:
> Sébastien Villemot writes:
>
> > On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 10:16:18PM -0700, Dima Kogan wrote:
> >
> >> These packages are not perfect, but I think they're good-enough to push.
> >> So I just pushed
es.
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Developers" [1].
> So I cannot apply at the moment or in the near future.
What about generating a new key and looking for a DD to sign it? There are many
DDs offering key signing, especially in Italy (where I guess you live):
https://wiki.debian.org/Keysigning/Offers
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
cal piece of information may go unnoticed for a
long time by third parties, including potentially interested maintainers. And
this doesn't prevent the future maintainer from keeping it in Debian Science.
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebast
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
On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 12:21:28PM +0200, Antonio Valentino wrote:
> I prepared the debian package for the new upstream version of numexpr:
> 2.6.5 [1,2].
> It would be nice if you could upload it.
Uploaded, thanks.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷
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
pload (taking inspiration from the examples given in uscan(1) manpage
for github repos).
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
+0200
Shouldn't you also close #896567 ?
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
u should keep their names (adding yours as a
> > > third one). Removing them in this context would be rude.
> > >
> >
> Done!
Thanks, I have made the upload (with two extra commits, one for fixing the
watch file which was broken, and the other one for removing the obsolete
get-o
ocedure with the field debian/uploaders field.
>
> In any case, it's no problem for me to keep their names.
Since they have not asked to be removed, and unless they are MIA (Missing in
Action), you should keep their names (adding yours as a third one). Removing
them in this context would
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.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
OBOn Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 05:49:16PM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 03:31:29PM +, Lumin wrote:
>
> > Four symbol links are installed to usr/lib/${DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH}/mkl/
> > directory, see [2][3]. Using ld.so environt variable to swit
update-alternatives --set libblas.so.3-@DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH@
/usr/lib/@DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH@/libmkl_rt.so
(and similarly for other alternative groups)
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Descrip
ch one of them has a specific
subdir under /usr/lib/${DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH}/). So the same should probably be
done for MKL.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
t, if someone links with -lblas, then he is only
asking for the BLAS ABI and not more. If someone wants to link against symbols
specific to ATLAS/OpenBLAS, then he should link against -latlas/-lopenblas.
So, for consistency, I think it is ok to register MKL as providing
libblas.so/liblapack.so.
Best,
ied:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-science/2018/04/msg00016.html
This time I’m putting you in CC in case you’re not subscribed to the list (but
you’re supposed to be unless you tell otherwise).
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.v
ties are meant to express what Debian thinks is the best option to
implement BLAS. I can’t see how we could collectively think that MKL is better
than OpenBLAS: we have always valued freedom above performance or features,
it is the essence of this project.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ed in providing a license-impure
> option, but then we shouldn't be providing a non-free, and we don't need
> to rehash that argument.
There seems to be a consensus in favor of packaging MKL, so I don’t understand
why you’re saying this.
We’re just talking about clearly expressing the fac
lly I may well be personally interested in installing your MKL package,
for doing occasional benchmarks. But I don't want to have to modify the default
priorities for my daily usage (I would modify them temporarily for doing those
benchmarks).
Thanks,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian
d it to current
> standards.
Uploaded, thanks for your contribution.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
en Molina from the Uploaders field.
But this change is not documented in the changelog. Did they express their
desire to be removed?
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
te that, in addition to OpenBLAS, we have
ATLAS (which is more portable across architectures).
Nevertheless, if you are willing to do the packaging work, please integrate MKL
with the alternatives system, as described on this page:
https://wiki.debian.org/DebianScience/LinearAlgebraLibraries
bol _ZN5boost7archive6detail14basic_oarchiveC2Ej
used by debian/librheolef1/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/librheolef.so.1.0.0 found
in none of the libraries
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: 218 other similar warnings have been skipped (use -v
to see them all)
Thanks for your contribution.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébast
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 04:50:29PM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> - there are files under Copyright 2000 Gray Watson and under the NTP license,
> not mentioned in debian/copyright:
> config/dmalloc_return.h
> util/dmallocxx/conf.h
> util/dmallocxx/dmallocc.cc
>
ensure it is accurate.
Note that you can also use "cme fix dpkg-copyright" from
libconfig-model-dpkg-perl once you are finish, to fix some
automatically-fixable mistakes.
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
le format of
debian/copyright at the following place:
https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
l
> https://packages.qa.debian.org/p/python-neuroshare.html
Note that xppaut and python-neuroshare are not currently maintained by the
Debian Science Team. So if you want to move these packages to Debian Science,
you first have to obtain permission from the current maintainers.
Welcome!
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébast
e any blocker, other than lack of time? I'm willing to help if needed.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 09:30:44PM +, Ghislain Vaillant wrote:
> python{,3}-spyderlib are translational packages, hence the failure. The
> default autopkgtests for Python are not appropriate for this source
> package.
Ok, uploaded.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian
d2: [---
Testing with python3.6:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "", line 1, in
ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'spyderlib'
autopkgtest [21:50:57]: test command2: ---]
autopkgtest [21:50:57]: test command2: - - - - - - - - - - results
t push the
debian/$VERSION git tag to the repository (per Debian Science Policy, see
https://science-team.pages.debian.net/policy/#idm56 )
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Descriptio
1 - 100 of 212 matches
Mail list logo
