On 15 February 2012 18:19, Alexander Hansen <alexanderk.han...@gmail.com> wrote: > When packaging Octave Forge packages for Fink, I have been removing > functions that shadow identically-named functions in Octave core, since > normally the situation has been that the package is older than the > particular Octave release (e.g. 3.4.3 or 3.6.0), and I assumed that > these functions had been subsumed into Octave core in identical form. > > Would it be preferable for me _not_ to do this, however?
Some packages shadow core functions on purpose. This is the case of fstat in statistics and great part of the NaN package. > Or maybe only > do it when the m-file or oct-file in a package is _identical_ to what is > in Octave core? I'll admit that I didn't do exhaustive testing of > whether what I was removing was indeed identical to what was in core. I guess every case is a case. If you could report every case on the mailing list we could help looking into it and at the same time we'd become aware of this. This is specially true for packages without maintainer that haven't seen a new release in a long time. Carnë ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/ _______________________________________________ Octave-dev mailing list Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
