[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 2.9.11?
From: |
John W. Eaton |
Subject: |
Re: 2.9.11? |
Date: |
Thu, 19 Apr 2007 13:09:11 -0400 |
On 19-Apr-2007, Thomas Weber wrote:
| Am Donnerstag, 19. April 2007 00:16 schrieb David Bateman:
| > The biggest remaining issue for a testing release for me is the package
| > manager. Till debian, fedora and MSVC builds sign off on the package
| > manager I don't think 2.9.11 will be really considered as a testing
| > release by the distributions..So it might be nice to check on the
| > progress of the use of the package manager for these three, to at least
| > avoid any hurried 2.9.12 release if possible.
|
| A new Octave release is not a problem for Debian. We will currently stay with
| 2.9.9 in the testing part of the distribution, until we've figured out how to
| integrate the Octave package manager [OPM] with the distribution package
| manager (or, more precisely: how to use the OPM for creating the packages).
|
| Some ideas are available at
| http://wiki.debian.org/OctavePackaging
I have no objection to modifying pkg.m to make it easier for Debian,
Fedora, or whoever to package Octave packages. So maybe a good place
to start is to decide what features you need to have so that it will
be easy for you to build a package around one that uses pkg.m.
Can we assume that you can run Octave when you are building the deb
or RPM package?
jwe
Re: 2.9.11?, Michael Goffioul, 2007/04/19
- Re: 2.9.11?, Thomas Weber, 2007/04/19
- Re: 2.9.11?, Michael Goffioul, 2007/04/19
- Re: 2.9.11?, Paul Kienzle, 2007/04/19
- Re: 2.9.11?, John W. Eaton, 2007/04/19
- Re: 2.9.11?, Michael Goffioul, 2007/04/19
- Re: 2.9.11?, John W. Eaton, 2007/04/25
- Re: 2.9.11?, Michael Goffioul, 2007/04/25