> $ octave -qf --eval "pkg load ocs" --persist
Interesting. It must be broken in Ubuntu. But it does work in lenny
for octave3.0. Yet another reason to not rely on ubuntu's packages for
octave. This is what happens for me on ubuntu:
$ octave3.0 -q --eval 'pkg list'
Package Name | Version | Insta
On 24 May 2010, at 21:51, Judd Storrs wrote:
> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 3:00 PM, c. wrote:
>> I tried the same test on my system and the number I see are
>> consistent
>> with yours.
>
> Do you mind if I ask how you did this? I've been trying but the timing
> differences I find seem to be due t
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 3:00 PM, c. wrote:
> I tried the same test on my system and the number I see are consistent
> with yours.
Do you mind if I ask how you did this? I've been trying but the timing
differences I find seem to be due to execution of the RC files not due
to directory structure. s
On 24 May 2010, at 20:12, Thomas Weber wrote:
> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 06:06:10PM +0200, c. wrote:
>>
>> On 24 May 2010, at 10:39, Thomas Weber wrote:
>>
>>> Ignoring the bug report,
>> I do not want the bug report to remain ignored, I am willing to help
>> find a fix, just not this way.
>
> I m
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Thomas Weber wrote:
> With quite some octave-forge packages installed (actually, all that are
> in Debian currently; v.m contains just an exit; command);
>
> $ time octave v.m
>
>
> real 0m2.820s
> user 0m2.168s
> sys 0m0.112s
>
> without any packages:
>
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 06:06:10PM +0200, c. wrote:
>
> On 24 May 2010, at 10:39, Thomas Weber wrote:
>
>> Ignoring the bug report,
> I do not want the bug report to remain ignored, I am willing to help
> find a fix, just not this way.
I meant this in the sense of "even without the bug report".
On 24 May 2010, at 10:39, Thomas Weber wrote:
> Ignoring the bug report,
I do not want the bug report to remain ignored, I am willing to help
find a fix, just not this way.
> the issue of start-up time for Octave remains.
I don't think there is any measurable performance hit due to the more
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 12:25:45AM +0200, Carlo de Falco wrote:
> 2010/5/23 Thomas Weber :
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm currently faced with a bug report against ocs in Debian (basically,
> > the PKG_ADD/PKG_DEL file assume they are in the same directory as all
> > the directories containing the .m files)
>
2010/5/23 Thomas Weber :
> Hi,
>
> I'm currently faced with a bug report against ocs in Debian (basically,
> the PKG_ADD/PKG_DEL file assume they are in the same directory as all
> the directories containing the .m files)
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=582750
>
> Before I spend
Hi,
I'm currently faced with a bug report against ocs in Debian (basically,
the PKG_ADD/PKG_DEL file assume they are in the same directory as all
the directories containing the .m files)
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=582750
Before I spend time trying to work-around this: is th
10 matches
Mail list logo
