On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 2:39 PM Benjamin Barenblat wrote:
> This is now in the NEW queue.
On Friday, June 19, 2020, at 8:07 AM +0200, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote:
> Not anymore and not in the archives. What happened? Can I help?
ftp-master rejected the upload with concerns that changing the
On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 2:39 PM Benjamin Barenblat wrote:
> This is now in the NEW queue.
Not anymore and not in the archives. What happened? Can I help?
Cheers,
Laszlo/GCS
This is now in the NEW queue.
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 5:56 PM Benjamin Barenblat wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 19, 2020, at 8:59 PM +0200, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote:
> > Doesn't build with GCC 10 due to symbol changes.
>
> Good point. Is there an established way to deal with this? Or should I
> just upload this as-is to
On Tuesday, May 19, 2020, at 8:59 PM +0200, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote:
> Doesn't build with GCC 10 due to symbol changes.
Good point. Is there an established way to deal with this? Or should I
just upload this as-is to unstable and then upload a GCC-10-compatible
version to experimental?
>
On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 6:28 PM Benjamin Barenblat wrote:
> Okay, we’re all set. I’ve pushed my work to
> https://salsa.debian.org/debian/abseil, and both command-line linking
> and CMake integration work. Comments and suggestions are welcome – if I
> don’t hear anything in the next day or two,
On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 6:28 PM Benjamin Barenblat wrote:
> Okay, we’re all set. I’ve pushed my work to
> https://salsa.debian.org/debian/abseil, and both command-line linking
> and CMake integration work. Comments and suggestions are welcome – if I
> don’t hear anything in the next day or two,
Okay, we’re all set. I’ve pushed my work to
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/abseil, and both command-line linking
and CMake integration work. Comments and suggestions are welcome – if I
don’t hear anything in the next day or two, I’ll go ahead and upload to
NEW.
I had to disable the Abseil
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 12:17 AM Benjamin Barenblat wrote:
> If it’s all right with you, I’d prefer to stick with src:abseil. That
> more closely matches the way the terminology is used within Google –
> “Abseil” is unambiguously the C++ project, and “Abseil Python” is its
> Python counterpart.
On Thursday, May 7, 2020, at 6:32 PM +0200, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote:
> If I understand correctly, you retained src:abseil. If not and using
> src:abseil-cpp then you need a new repository named after that. Which
> way should I go?
If it’s all right with you, I’d prefer to stick with
On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 5:57 PM Benjamin Barenblat wrote:
> I’m getting very close to an Abseil upload. The CMake integration
> doesn’t work yet, but I can install the binary packages and build
> software that links Abseil.
Good news.
> I’m going to keep working on CMake support, but I’d love to
I’m getting very close to an Abseil upload. The CMake integration
doesn’t work yet, but I can install the binary packages and build
software that links Abseil.
I’m going to keep working on CMake support, but I’d love to upload what
I have to Salsa. Would somebody be willing to reset the
On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 9:51 AM Olaf van der Spek
wrote:
> Op do 27 feb. 2020 om 06:54 schreef László Böszörményi :
> > Are you going to rename it to abseil-cpp (as Google has abseil-python
> > as well, make a disparity between the two)?
>
> Python libraries use a "python3-" prefix while C/C++
Op do 27 feb. 2020 om 06:54 schreef László Böszörményi :
> Are you going to rename it to abseil-cpp (as Google has abseil-python
> as well, make a disparity between the two)?
Python libraries use a "python3-" prefix while C/C++ libraries use a
"lib" prefix, so I don't think it makes sense to
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 10:28 PM Benjamin Barenblat wrote:
> https://github.com/abseil/abseil-cpp/pull/628 will let you test against
> the gtest in Debian simply by passing `-DABSL_RUN_TESTS=ON
> -DABSL_USE_GOOGLETEST_HEAD=OFF` to CMake. It looks like I just missed
> the LTS release of a few
On Sunday, February 16, 2020, at 10:48 PM +0100, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote:
> @Benjamin: may you ask its developers to use the system gtest libraries
> if only ABSL_RUN_TESTS set to ON?
On Tuesday, February 18, 2020, at 6:02 PM -0500, Benjamin Barenblat wrote:
> I have a preliminary version
On Tuesday, February 18, 2020, at 9:01 PM +0100, László Böszörményi (GCS)
wrote:
> There's a compatibility page[1] what Abseil is and isn't. It states
> the following things.
> "We do not promise any ABI compatibility — we intend for Abseil to be
> built from source, hopefully from head. The
On Tuesday, February 18, 2020, at 9:25 AM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> What about the C++ std version? Abseil / C++14 isn't the same as Abseil /
> C++17.
This is true on two levels:
1. By default, Abseil detects what standard version you’re building
with and conditionally defines
Hi all,
I have dropped almost all static (*.a)-files from libraries, which
I maintain(ed). The main reason is the easier security fixes
if any appear in the library. One need then basically rebuild
the so-files. With statically linked code the security fixes are much
harder: one need to rebuild
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 2:31 AM Benjamin Barenblat wrote:
> On Sunday, February 16, 2020, at 10:48 PM +0100, László Böszörményi (GCS)
> wrote:
> > In my reading abseil is _not_ guaranteed to have ABI compatibility at
> > all times. That's why it meant to be a static library collection only.
> >
What about the C++ std version? Abseil / C++14 isn't the same as Abseil / C++17.
This applies to other C++ libraries as well.
On Sunday, February 16, 2020, at 10:48 PM +0100, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote:
> In my reading abseil is _not_ guaranteed to have ABI compatibility at
> all times. That's why it meant to be a static library collection only.
> Forcing it to build shared libraries and have other packages than
>
Hi Anton, Benjamin,
On Sun, Feb 16, 2020 at 9:53 PM Anton Gladky wrote:
> feel free to check the package on salsa
> and prepare merge request.
I don't send a merge request as while it's a very little package we
do it very differently. In my reading abseil is _not_ guaranteed to
have ABI
Hi László,
feel free to check the package on salsa
and prepare merge request.
I am able to have a look at it on Thursday.
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/abseil
Regards
Anton
László Böszörményi (GCS) schrieb am So., 16. Feb. 2020,
14:14:
> Hi Anton, Benjamin,
>
> I also need abseil, to be
Hi Anton, Benjamin,
I also need abseil, to be precise abseil-cpp (as there's abseil-py as
well). Even contacted by some Google employee if I have time to
package it. Done it and ready to be uploaded. Do you allow me to take
over (and rename the package to abseil-cpp)? Feel free to do it
yourself,
25 matches
Mail list logo
