Bump, if only to show that I'm serious about maintaining the package. On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 1:19 PM, Marco Atzeri wrote: > +1 . Same comment about missing package procedure
Thanks for the vote. I'm sorry but if there's still an issue about packaging, or procedure, I need it pointed out. AFAIK the package is OK now. > This upstream package is not really thought for easy porting, > it inglobes a lot of library including gsl-1.14 while should be better > to link with cygwin gsl. Agreed. If this is a showstopper, I can check out if it works OK with the stock GSL. To the best of my knowledge astrometry.net doesn't actually change anything in GSL, they just omit what's not required. +3 at the moment ... -- jussi
