[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: precompiled 3.4 for Debian/Ubuntu: was Re: still problems, version?
From: |
Uwe Brauer |
Subject: |
Re: precompiled 3.4 for Debian/Ubuntu: was Re: still problems, version? |
Date: |
Tue, 19 Jul 2011 18:42:56 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) XEmacs/21.5-b29 (linux) |
> 2011/7/19 Uwe Brauer <address@hidden>:
> I've never used auto-apt, but it only seems to install
> missing debs detected when building. It shouldn't be
> necessary because you installed the build-deps, and if
> it *was* necessary, then the build-deps are indeed
> outdated and we need to update them for 3.4.
Another issue, after building and installing I wanted to
save a graphic and it turned out that I had to install
pstoedit and epstool
> This is an ok way of generating personal debs, but
> please don't upload them to a PPA and encourage people
> to use them. Octave packaging is not a trivial task
> that can be automated. If you want to help, please read
> the Debian new maintainer's guide and help us update
> our packaging, that has many intricate details related
> to bugs and situations that have arisen over the years
> while packaging Octave.
> We need to update our webpage, but most of the information here is
> still relevant:
> http://pkg-octave.alioth.debian.org/
Ok that seems to be a good place to start.
> What commands?
Well basically the following script should work:
,----
| graphics_toolkit fltk %3.4
| %backend fltk % 3.2
|
| function Psi=FdOn320(x,y,z)
| r=sqrt(x.^2+y.^2+z.^2);
| Psi=exp(-r./3).*(3*z.^2-r.^2).*2*sqrt(15/(120*pi))/81;
| end
|
| [x,y,z]=meshgrid(-20:.5:20);
| Psi=FdOn320(x,y,z);
| m=min(Psi(:));
| M=max(Psi(:));
| color=[1 1 0;1 0 1; 0 1 1;0 1 0;1 0 0; 0 0 1; 0 0 0];
| n=2;
| for i=1:n-1
| isovalue=m+i*(M-m)/n;
| fv = isosurface(x,y,z,Psi,isovalue);
| hpatch = patch(fv)
| isonormals(x,y,z,Psi,hpatch);
| Alphalevel=0.2+0.8*i/n;
| %
set(hpatch,'FaceAlpha',Alphalevel,'FaceColor',color(i,:),'EdgeColor','none')
| set(hpatch,'FaceColor',color(i,:),'EdgeColor','black')
| % daspect([1,1,1])
| view(3);
| axis tight
| % camlight left;
| end
`----
It does not work in 3.2 (there already a tread about this
issue) and it seems to work in 3.4, although I must add that
the results I obtain are slightly different from the results
of others, but that is a different issue.
> Because people want to install Octave in clusters, so why should we
> force them to install the documentation on every cluster, in both HTML
> and TeXinfo? Why should people that don't intend to help us debug wait
> longer downloading and installing the debug symbols, which are almost
> eight times the size of Octave itself? If you are not going to be
> building oct files, why should you also need Octave's headers? Why
> should every single Octave-Forge package be installed, some of which
> may be broken, as is or was for a long time the case oct2mat on the
> Windows distribution, and many are in fact incompatible with each
> other and with core Octave functions?
I don't want to start a flame war or anything like this and
the reasons you give below seem sound, however for me they
look valid at a time, where disk space was small and
bandwidth tiny. Today I fail to see that the complication
caused by this approach outweights really its
disadvantages (that is make if difficult for volunteers to enter).
> I know this seems like unnecessary complication from
> the outside, but it's not. Every person has different
> needs, and Debian needs to cater to many different
> needs, plus 11 different architectures. A personal .deb
> package is fine for personal builds, but it won't
> satisfy our users, and you can't ignore the complexity
> that building a proper package entails.
How is the situation with rpm, it is so long time ago that I
used them, are they also parted in many small rpms?
> It's not that they're picky, anyone who does the work
> can be a maintainer. The problem is that being a
> maintainer is hard work and not just a matter of
> running a few automated tools that build a low quality
> deb that only works on very specific environments and
> for very specific usages.
I know, I maintain some Xemacs pkg myself (which is not
very hard work) but to be a Debian or Ubuntu is a very
different situation.
> Ubuntu encourages people to modify their sources.list file to point to
> any old repository with little regard for the quality or safety of the
> packages installed from that repository. I would prefer if you didn't
> encourage Ubuntu users to do this for Octave packages and instead you
> helped us update the Octave package correctly. This is not plain
> snobbery; it is simple the best use of our limited volunteer-driven
> efforts.
This I can believe, it is that I am forced to consider 3.4
and haven't found any precompiled packages. What is wrong
with the approach to have experimental debs for the
impatient with a big warning message and wait for Ubuntu and
Debian to catch up?
Uwe
- Re: matlab code: isovalues and isosurface, (continued)
- Re: matlab code: isovalues and isosurface, Martin Helm, 2011/07/16
- still problems, version? (was: matlab code: isovalues and isosurface), Uwe Brauer, 2011/07/16
- Re: still problems, version? (was: matlab code: isovalues and isosurface), Martin Helm, 2011/07/16
- Re: still problems, version? (was: matlab code: isovalues and isosurface), Martin Helm, 2011/07/16
- precompiled 3.4 for Debian/Ubuntu: was Re: still problems, version?, Uwe Brauer, 2011/07/17
- Re: precompiled 3.4 for Debian/Ubuntu: was Re: still problems, version?, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, 2011/07/17
- Re: precompiled 3.4 for Debian/Ubuntu: was Re: still problems, version?, Uwe Brauer, 2011/07/18
- Re: precompiled 3.4 for Debian/Ubuntu: was Re: still problems, version?, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, 2011/07/18
- Re: precompiled 3.4 for Debian/Ubuntu: was Re: still problems, version?, Uwe Brauer, 2011/07/19
- Re: precompiled 3.4 for Debian/Ubuntu: was Re: still problems, version?, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, 2011/07/19
- Re: precompiled 3.4 for Debian/Ubuntu: was Re: still problems, version?,
Uwe Brauer <=
- Re: precompiled 3.4 for Debian/Ubuntu: was Re: still problems, version?, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, 2011/07/19
- Re: precompiled 3.4 for Debian/Ubuntu: was Re: still problems, version?, Uwe Brauer, 2011/07/20
- Re: precompiled 3.4 for Debian/Ubuntu: was Re: still problems, version?, Liam Groener, 2011/07/21
- Re: still problems, version?, Uwe Brauer, 2011/07/20
- Message not available
- Re: 3.4: one surface is missing (was: still problems, version?), Liam Groener, 2011/07/21
- Re: 3.4: one surface is missing, Uwe Brauer, 2011/07/21
- Re: 3.4: one surface is missing, Liam Groener, 2011/07/21
- Re: 3.4: one surface is missing, Uwe Brauer, 2011/07/21
- Re: still problems, version? (was: matlab code: isovalues and isosurface), Philip Nienhuis, 2011/07/16