GSoC2019, I introduced a blas/lapack runtime 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/lapa
s can happen, 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://sebas
ckages 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.org
sign
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
iculty here is that 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
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
>
.org/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
Descr
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
anism, and not OpenBLAS (the libopenblas.so.0 ->
> libopenblas-r0.3.8.so).
The choice via the update-alternatives mechanism does not matter much
at link time, as long as your are doing dynamic linking (and not static
linking). It only matters at runtime.
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastie
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
e doing static
linking, 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 D
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.
--
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 is
&
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
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
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
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.villemot.na
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
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ htt
/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
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
e: liblapack.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
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
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 startin
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
s 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 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.
>
&
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 :
> &
mpleted the migration away from the old
CLAPACK in clapack.patch.
Only a minor cleanup was still needed to 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
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
ou cannot specify the buildd yourself.
However, buildd admins seem to have that power. So I guess the way
forward is to write to debian-wb-team@l.d.o asking for a give back and
explaining why it needs to happen on a specific buildd.
--
.''`.Sébastien Villemot
: :' :
(because of
dependencies)
- the other is libatlas.so: it perferctly makes sense to provide a
distinct atlas.pc for that one, but it should be a distinct file,
totally independent of blas.pc.
--
.''`. Sébastien Villemot
: :' :Debian Developer
`. `' http://www.dynare.
Le mardi 04 mars 2014 à 14:40 +0100, Michael Banck a écrit :
> On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 02:37:28PM +0100, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> > Le mardi 04 mars 2014 à 13:18 +0100, Michael Banck a écrit :
> > > cp2k FTBFS on s390x[1], because:
> > >
> > > 1. The c
this problem.
As long as mpich does not get renamed again in the foreseeable future,
this may not be necessary.
Cheers,
--
.''`.Sébastien Villemot
: :' :Debian Developer
`. `' http://www.dynare.org/sebastien
`- GPG Key: 4096R/381A7594
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
forward, provided we reach some
consensus on the right technical solution. All comments are therefore
very welcome.
Cheers,
--
.''`.Sébastien Villemot
: :' :Debian Developer
`. `' http://www.dynare.org/sebastien
`- GPG Key: 4096R/381A7594
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Le mercredi 12 mars 2014 à 18:44 +0100, Sébastien Villemot a écrit :
> More specifically, I think that dh_fortran_mod should do the following:
>
> - it would read a file debian/[package.]fortran-mod, which would contain
> a list of mod files created by gfortran and to be installed
owever that my help would necessarily be limited, since I am not
familiar with the math underlying slicot.
Cheers,
--
.''`.Sébastien Villemot
: :' :Debian Developer
`. `' http://www.dynare.org/sebastien
`- GPG Key: 4096R/381A7594
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
fix to #714730, but in the
short term I guess we should manually generate the list of package to be
rebuilt. I am willing to do that if agreed by the Release Team.
--
.''`.Sébastien Villemot
: :' :Debian Developer
`. `' http://www.dynare.org/sebastien
Le samedi 03 mai 2014 à 21:46 +0200, Tobias Burnus a écrit :
> Matthias Klose wrote:
> > Am 24.03.2014 18:46, schrieb Sébastien Villemot:
> >> Le mercredi 12 mars 2014 à 18:44 +0100, Sébastien Villemot a écrit :
> >>> More specifically, I think that dh_fortr
od format (while it is the
GCC version for C++).
--
.''`. Sébastien Villemot
: :' :Debian Developer
`. `' http://www.dynare.org/sebastien
`- GPG Key: 4096R/381A7594
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Le mercredi 07 mai 2014 à 15:51 +0200, Matthias Klose a écrit :
> Am 07.05.2014 15:43, schrieb Sébastien Villemot:
> > Le samedi 03 mai 2014 à 21:18 +0200, Matthias Klose a écrit :
> >> Package: release.debian.org
> >>
> >> GCC 4.9 changes the module versi
report which were the packages needing a
binNMU, so the Release Team has all the necessary information for
handling this transition.
--
.''`.Sébastien Villemot
: :' :Debian Developer
`. `' http://www.dynare.org/sebastien
`- GPG Key: 4096R/381A7594
signature.
ase give back slepc? It failed to recompile because it
build depends on petsc, which was not yet recompiled for the new
Fortran.
Thanks,
--
.''`.Sébastien Villemot
: :' :Debian Developer
`. `' http://www.dynare.org/sebastien
`- GPG Key: 4096R/381A7594
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
debian. It's part of the work for
> sagemath in debian, and should only need a light review since I did
> nothing fancy...
Uploaded to unstable (I assumed this was your target distribution,
despite the freeze, since the package has no rdep and a very low
popcon).
Thanks for your contrib
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Sébastien Villemot"
* Package name: r-cran-rsdmx
Version : 0.4.5
Upstream Author : Emmanuel Blondel
* URL : http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/rsdmx/index.html
* License : GPL-2+
Programming Lang: R
D
want suitesparse to stay
in main.
So either 1) and 3). I'm personally indifferent between the two,
because I'm not interested in non-free software.
Cheers,
--
.''`.Sébastien Villemot
: :' :Debian Developer
`. `' http://sebastien.villemot.name
`- GPG Key: 4096R/381A7594
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Le mercredi 30 mars 2016 à 22:33 +0200, Sébastien Villemot a écrit :
> Le mercredi 30 mars 2016 à 22:03 +0200, Wolfgang Fütterer a écrit :
> >
> > IMHO there are the following options to continue:
> >
> > 1) Removing suitesparse-metis from unstable
> >
> >
2.
> Sébastien, are you available for updating superlu?
No, sorry.
--
.''`.Sébastien Villemot
: :' :Debian Developer
`. `' http://sebastien.villemot.name
`- GPG Key: 4096R/381A7594
Le mardi 10 janvier 2017 à 12:05 +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:29:14AM +0100, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> > If it is the former, it makes senses to remove r-base (+ octave and
> > julia). But if it is the latter (and it is what I was implicitly
&
f to make that change for buster.
--
.''`.Sébastien Villemot
: :' :Debian Developer
`. `' http://sebastien.villemot.name
`- GPG Key: 4096R/381A7594
apparently that build-profiles are meant to
be compatible with reproducible builds (while by definition
optimized-build are not reproducible across machines).
Cheers,
--
.''`.Sébastien Villemot
: :' :Debian Developer
`. `' http://sebastien.villemot.name
`- GPG Key: 4096R/381A7594
m
> back
> on, be my guest and revert that commit.
Debian Policy §8.3: “The static library (libraryname.a) is usually
provided in addition to the shared version. It is placed into the
development package.”
Cheers,
--
.''`.Sébastien Villemot
: :' :Debian Developer
`. `&#
single shared library.”
Looking at package names, shared libraries have different SOVERSIONs (0,
1 and 2 seem to be used). So it seems that this constraint is not
fulfilled by sundials, though I am not sufficiently familiar with the
package to make a definitive judgment.
Cheers,
--
.
package for several dynamic
libraries with different SOVERSIONs).
The only benefit of splitting the -dev package is to save some disk
space on developers' machines who don't need all the libraries. IMHO it
is not worth the trouble (in comparison with the extra maintenance work
and the overhead on Debian mirrors).
--
.''`.Sébastien Villemot
: :' :Debian Developer
`. `' http://sebastien.villemot.name
`- GPG Key: 4096R/381A7594
dscs --debsnap".
If the maintainer does not answer you then you may contact the MIA team
in order to have the packaged orphaned. For more details, see:
https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/MIA
Since this process is likely to take time, you can also work on an NMU
in the meantime.
Cheers,
--
ively fork? Would you be interested in maintaining
it (upstream and/or in Debian)?
Cheers,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
hesitate to ask me.
By the way, I see that there are now two sundials repositories on
alioth (sundials.git and sundials_dima_kogan.git). Which one is the
right one? Some clean-up would probably be warranted.
Cheers,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
ense
> just to drop octave build-depends on sundials (which should make your
> life easier).
No, the dependency on sundials that will be introduced in Octave 4.4
has to do with new functions introduced in the Octave interpreter (for
solving ODEs).
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debia
of the libraries
Obviously, libmathicgb is underlinked. It misses at least a dependency on
libmathic, and maybe more.
Cheers,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
Le vendredi 04 août 2017 à 11:52 +0200, Kay F. Jahnke a écrit :
> Am 14.07.2017 um 15:40 schrieb Sébastien Villemot:
> > I am the maintainer of einspline in Debian (under the Debian Science
> > umbrella).
> >
> > I am wondering what should be done with that pack
Le lundi 07 août 2017 à 10:42 +0200, Sébastien Villemot a écrit :
> Concerning vspline, I am of course willing to help you get it into
> Debian. However, you should be aware that you are expected to do proper
> ABI tracking of the library once it is packaged (see [1]; see also [2]
> i
On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 06:39:00PM -0400, Doug Torrance wrote:
> On 08/06/2017 07:02 AM, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> > Le vendredi 04 août 2017 à 21:47 -0400, Doug Torrance a écrit :
> > > Would anyone be able to sponsor mathic and mathicgb?
> > >
> > > I&
see the point of it).
Hopefully it will pass NEW, and when it does, we can contact the Release Team
for starting the transition.
Thanks Dima, James and Andreas for your contribution to this update.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villem
issue had to do with a broken makefile
rule for binary-indep. I also fixed a lintian error and the autopkgtest
failure.
However, this may not be the end of the story. Version 0.8.0-1 failed to build
on several release archs, so we may have to deal with some additional
portability issues, we’ll see.
On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 10:09:31AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 11:19:26PM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> >
> > > I just want to announce that I will not have time for any relevant
> > > Debian work and that it would really help if somebody
endencies of vspline-dev
+ In the Vcs-Browser field, replace "/git/" by "/cgit/"
+ The indentation in the long description of vspline-dev is wrong. You can
fix automatically it by running "cme fix dpkg" (after installing the
libconfig-model-dpkg-perl package)
Thanks for your work,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
This is because of #861333 (essentially an ABI breakage). r-base is therefore
prevented to migrate to testing, and since R packages have a tight dependency
on the latest version of R, they cannot migrate either. Lots of R packages are
currently stuck in unstable for that reason.
Cheers,
--
roblem, and my understanding is that the
Release Team would be ready to schedule binNMUs once this is done.
The difficult point is to deal with binNMU’d version number of reverse
dependencies, which can differ across architectures. But this list can probably
be generated by some smart query against
(note that you can use "dch --create" to recreate the changelog from scratch
with the correct entry).
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Sat, Sep 09, 2017 at 09:28:23PM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> In the process of multi-archifying our BLAS and LAPACK packages (src:lapack,
> src:atlas, src:openblas), I realized that there is now a src:clapack package
> in
> the archive, maintained by our team.
>
> The
t rid of clapack.
Best,
> On Sat, Sep 09, 2017 at 09:55:59PM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 09, 2017 at 09:28:23PM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> >
> > > In the process of multi-archifying our BLAS and LAPACK packages
> > > (src:lapack,
>
On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 07:36:19AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 12:14:17AM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> >
> > Since clapack and lapack provide exactly the same API and ABI, and actually
> > exactly the same algorithms (the only difference
On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 10:43:48AM +0200, Kay F. Jahnke wrote:
> Am 09.09.2017 um 13:26 schrieb Sébastien Villemot:
> > Dear Kay,
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 09, 2017 at 12:46:39PM +0200, Kay F. Jahnke wrote:
> >
> > > I've started afresh in the way y
On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 10:11:24AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> PS: Feel free to ask for removal of clapack (or alternatively ask me to
> do so)
Thanks, done in #875564 (for sid) and #875565 (for stretch).
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀
that
patches that you contribute will not be under a license suitable for upstream.
So the recommended practice is to use the same license in the packaging as
upstream, but in the last analysis this is your call.
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ h
n ABI break, but this is a rather
theoretical debate. In practice this proposed change does the job.
Then the Release Team will schedule binNMUs for all R reverse dependencies, and
everything will migrate to testing. Of course this means more rebuilds than
strictly necessary, but who cares
ase push it there
(note that I will be uploading what is in the git, not on mentors).
I recommend that you create the git repository using:
gbp import-dsc --pristine-tar segyio_.dsc
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.
don’t top-post :)
Thanks for your work,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ese binaries are not the main product, but just a few auxiliary utilities,
then segyio-bin is probably a good choice.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
should not be "1",
but the upstream version in which the symbol appeared in Debian, which is
"1.3.3".
- in debian/copyright, the pycmake/ stanza contains a link to the LGPL text,
not the GPL text
- in debian/control, "section: libs" should be capitalized (&qu
load of ftpmasters. So please be patient. Future uploads won’t have
to go through this, unless you introduce a new binary package.
Thanks for your contribution to Debian,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.o
oth.debian.org (which is high traffic,
because it gets the bug reports of all packages maintained by the team); or you
can subscribe to segyio on http://tracker.debian.org (once it appears there,
i.e. after your upload has been accepted).
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian
ully rebuilt?
Done. I reopened #868558 and transformed it into a transition bug, with a
request for rebuilds.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
;
> Could anyone take it from here?
I tried to compile from the git but it fails at the very beginning:
find-netcdf.patch does not apply…
Also note that I pushed a small change, so don't forget to git pull before
working on it.
Cheers,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debia
lution (I guess the debate is then about how broken they are).
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:52:56PM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:43:00PM +0200, Anton Gladky wrote:
>
> > one more option is to drop pandas on those archs (filing
> > RM bug) and fill the list of supported archs explicitly
> > in d/con
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 04:05:46PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 04:00:23PM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:52:56PM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:43:00PM +0200, Anton Gladky wrote:
>
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 04:41:52PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 04:17:29PM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> > >
> > > So who is going to file the RM bug?
> >
> > And the good news is that there is no dependency problem (even if it
p of a package that
did not build in the first place, and that is not lintian clean either. This is
clearly a waste of sponsors' time.
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ou can probably get access even as a non-DD), or someone else has to do
it.
I am leaving it here for now, because I only have the time for sponsorship, not
for maintenance of the package.
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ ht
to sponsor your request.
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
act of the most recent uploads.
This will soon be reflected in the tracker and various web pages.
R-related uploads can therefore be resumed.
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
D
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 happened, thanks to the Release Team that
> | took appropriate acti
Dear Kay,
On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 11:59:04AM +0200, Kay F. Jahnke wrote:
> Am 10.09.2017 um 14:13 schrieb Sébastien Villemot:
>
> > I uploaded your package. Note that it has to go through the so-called NEW
> > queue, which means it is waiting manual processing by ftpmasters.
lder? Could somebody
> please have a look? If not the only chance I see is to deactivate armhf
> for pandas.
pandas is uncompiled on armhf, so this is not a blocker for testing migration.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 10:24:57AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 02:17:26PM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> > > (see build log[2]). My suspicion is that this is not really an error in
> > > the test suite but some problem with the autobui
ber of DDs who are offering key signing in various
places (including Berlin):
https://wiki.debian.org/Keysigning/Offers#DE
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ckage by several people (Gilles Filippini and Sébastien Villemot)
> under the Debian Science Team umbrella.
>
> Finally the upstream homepage says 6.0.0 is out since february.
>
> So my questions are:
> - is it O or not?
> - who's working on packaging 6.0.0?
> - is it
oad. Thanks for your contribution.
Best,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
and package is uploaded to mentors for review.
I made the upload. I just added a fix for bug #871662.
Thanks for your contribution,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄ http://www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 08:48:52AM +0100, Kay F. Jahnke wrote:
> Am 18.11.2017 um 14:10 schrieb Sébastien Villemot:
> > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:58:22AM +0100, Kay F. Jahnke wrote:
> > > I also modified the lists of files to be installed, to reflect one added
> > &
1 - 100 of 223 matches
Mail list logo
