Dima Pasechnik wrote:
I understand that Debian support is on hold. AFAIK, a proper Debian
requires a complete refactoring
of the code, in particular removing all the things that are not really
Sage, e.g. mercurial, gap, singular, etc etc etc.
I understand it has been done at some point for Sage 3, but then the
main person who did that
got a "real" job and dropped out.
One can certainly package Sage as a .deb, but does this make much
sense?
Best,
Dmitrii
Could an argument not be made to the Debian people that the code is gap singular
etc, but patched versions of them. Call them Foo and Bar if necessary! No
seriously, I can understand them not wanting 'standard' things packaged, but if
the items are significantly modified from the 'standard' distribution, then
there seems to be an valid argument for it being available.
In the case of Mercical, there is probably some logic to not distributing that.
I assume it is only of need to developers, and it is pretty easy to install.
drkir...@hawk:~/sage-4.3.1.rc0/spkg/standard$ ls *.spkg | wc
93 93 2065
drkir...@hawk:~/sage-4.3.1.rc0/spkg/standard$ ls *.p[0-9].spkg | wc
67 67 1507
shows 67 of the 93 packages in standard are patched. But in many cases, even
those that have no patch number will have patches.
Ultimately, if you make a .deb, and someone wants to install it, should you
really care what the Debian maintainers feel?
--
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
