Re: [Octave Forge] Octave 4.0 call for packages

[Philip Nienhuis]

John Donoghue-2 wrote
> On 04/11/2015 12:00 PM, 

> octave-maintainers-request@

>  wrote:
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2015 08:40:24 -0700 (PDT)
>> From: Philip Nienhuis<

> address@hidden

> >
>> To:

> octave-maintainers@

>> Subject: Re: [Octave Forge] Octave 4.0 call for packages
>> Message-ID:<

> address@hidden

>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>
>> John Donoghue-2 wrote
>>> >On 04/11/2015 08:19 AM,
>>> >octave-maintainers-request@
>>> >  wrote:
>>>> >>Message: 5
>>>> >>Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2015 14:07:14 +0200
>>>> >>From: Oliver Heimlich&lt;
>>> >oheim@
>>> >&gt;
>>>> >>To:
>>> >octave-maintainers@
>>>> >>Subject: Re: [Octave Forge] Octave 4.0 call for packages
>>>> >>Message-ID:<
>>> >55290E72.5090404@
>>>> >>
>>>> >>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>>>> >>
>>>> >>On 11.04.2015 11:56, Oliver Heimlich wrote:
>>>>>> >>> >On 11.04.2015 03:25, Mike Miller wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>> >>Would you mind sharing the test failures you are seeing?
>>>>>>>> Either as
>>>>>> >>>>bug
>>>>>>>> >>>> >>reports against each package or a summary log file sent to
>>>>>>>> the list
>>>>>> >>>>or
>>>>>>>> >>>> >>posted somewhere. Full output would be most helpful as many
>>>>>> >>>>developers
>>>>>>>> >>>> >>are unable to test on Windows.
>>>>>>>> >>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >>>> >>Thanks,
>>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>> >>> >I am going to put the results into our wiki [1] as a table. I
>>>>>> can put
>>>>>> >>> >the test logs on a private website and link to them in the
>>>>>> table. Then,
>>>>>> >>> >we can collect references to existing bug reports/patches in a
>>>>>> >>> >structured way. This should simplify the assessment of all
>>>>>> packages
>>>>>> >>> >together. And it might help to sort out deprecated packages.
>>>> >>You can find the results in the wiki:
>>>> >>http://wiki.octave.org/Octave-Forge#GNU_Octave_4.0_compatibility_assessment
>>>> >>
>>>> >>The wiki contains a link to my test logs from Win7.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>So far, there are 13 packages that seem fit, 10 with bug reports or
>>>> >>known fixes. Many where I am unsure about their current state. Please
>>>> >>update the status of packages that you know better than I do.
>>>> >>
>>> >Nice table!!
>>> >I added columns for win32 - as yet unpopulated
>> Why would there be differences between 32 and 64 bit Windows as regards
>> OF-packages compatibility with 32-bit Octave?
>>
>> I'd rather expect quite a few differences between 32- and 64-bit versions
>> of
>> Octave itself (obviously the latter will only run on Win64).
>>
>> Philip
>>
>>
> 
> There are some differences, whether from the fact of being Win32 vs 
> Win64 or not?

Not sure I follow :-)
AFAIK 32-bit Windows applications should run identically whether in 32- or
64 bit Windows.


> Should the results of a octave 64 bit version also be posted

That depends on whether there are plans to supply a 64-bit installer as well
(I suppose just --enable-windows-64, not 64-bit indexing).

As to the installer, there also other questions as regards the io package.
Several spreadsheet functions / interfaces require Java support libs (.jar
files). Do we also include those? And if yes, which ones?
Or should I start a separate thread for this question?

Philip



--
View this message in context: 
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/Octave-Forge-Octave-4-0-call-for-packages-tp4669204p4669783.html
Sent from the Octave - Maintainers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.