2009/2/5 <ja...@njkfrudils.plus.com>: > > On Wednesday 04 February 2009 19:54:03 Bill Hart wrote: >> Thanks. As soon as we release, it would be great if you could give it >> a go and we can issue a service release. >> > > Should I create a branch for it?
I don't think that is a good idea. We should release, then do this in trunk. Otherwise we are going to have to do it all over again! I would release, but I am still waiting on: 1) Results of mabshoff's build testing on SkyNet 2) Someone to move the tarball and webpage over to www.mpir.org (I don't have access). > > I cant do the windows bits , Brian ? Brian already did this once, so I am sure he will be able to do it again once we make the decision to switch to libmpir instead of libgmp. > > I dont do C++ , and I dont know how comprehensive the make check c++ bit is , > if someone can email me some c++ programs , I can test them Oh yes, we also have libgmpxx. I had forgotten about that. I also don't do c++. > > I can leave or delete the old directory mpbsd ? Don't think we can delete that. I don't know who uses it, but we shouldn't get rid of it unless we are absolutely sure. > > I assume we are going to leave internal names as __gmp_blah etc > Yes, no function names should change. Bill. > > >> Bill. >> >> 2009/2/4 <ja...@njkfrudils.plus.com>: >> > On Wednesday 04 February 2009 18:35:24 Bill Hart wrote: >> >> Hi Mariah, >> >> >> >> 2009/2/4 Mariah <mariah.le...@gmail.com>: >> >> > Bill, >> >> > >> >> > On Feb 4, 12:25 am, Bill Hart <goodwillh...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> >> >> I have placed a tarball here: >> >> >> >> >> >> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/wbhart/mpir-0.9.0.tar.gz >> >> > >> >> > Some quick observations - >> >> > >> >> > 1. It looks like you have to build in the source tree. Many software >> >> > packages let you have an object directory separate from the source >> >> > directory. This is useful for networks with lots of different >> >> > architectures hanging on them. You only need one copy of the source >> >> > file. >> >> >> >> Autotools is supposed to let you do that as standard. We may have >> >> broken something which allows that, or perhaps it was never possible >> >> with GMP. I don't know. I'll add a trac ticket and we can look at >> >> this. >> >> >> >> > 2. The built include and library files are gmp.h, libgmp.a, etc. >> >> > Shouldn't they be mpir.h, libmpir.a? Leaving the names as gmp.h, >> >> > libgmp.a may discourage system dministrators from overwriting the >> >> > system gmp.h, libgmp.a from GNU gmp. I can see that you may need an >> >> > option for symbolic links (gmp.h -> mpir.h, etc) for legacy software >> >> > that expects (gmp.h, libgmp.a). But surely you want to encourage >> >> > projects to transition to MPIR (and not remain with GMP). >> >> >> >> We have decided not to do this for MPIR-0.9.0. >> >> >> >> Actually, none of us know how to do it aanyway! Perhaps either you or >> >> Michael can help with this. I looked into it and didn't even know >> >> where to start. We do have a trac ticket for it. >> >> >> >> Bill. >> > >> > I know how to do this , mostly. >> > >> > Jason >> >> > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mpir-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to mpir-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mpir-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
