bblas: 1.16.0 → 2.0.0
superlu:5 → 6
hypre: 2.26.0 → 2.28.0
mumps:5.5 → 5.6
I want to bump hypre to 2.28.0 not 2.29.0
since PETSc cannot yet use hypre 2.29.0.
I do not want to bump PETSc to 3.19 yet, because of errors
with dolfin (#1042000) and dolfinx (#1042003).
Each package has
Drew Parsons writes:
> On Sun, 2018-05-20 at 16:12 -0700, Dima Kogan wrote:
>> I'm working on Sundials right now, and I noticed that Debian ships
>> the
>> non-parallelized SuperLU (in "libsuperlu..." packages) but not the
>> multi-threaded
On Sun, 2018-05-20 at 16:12 -0700, Dima Kogan wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> I'm working on Sundials right now, and I noticed that Debian ships
> the
> non-parallelized SuperLU (in "libsuperlu..." packages) but not the
> multi-threaded superlu-mt. Upstream:
>
> ht
Hi all.
I'm working on Sundials right now, and I noticed that Debian ships the
non-parallelized SuperLU (in "libsuperlu..." packages) but not the
multi-threaded superlu-mt. Upstream:
http://crd-legacy.lbl.gov/~xiaoye/SuperLU/
Does anybody know if there's some specific re
Once the petsc/slepc transition (to 3.7) is settled in, I want to
proceed with the superlu transition from 4 to 5. The transition bug
#835397 is filed at
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=835397
The packages affected by superlu are:
superlu
armadillo
getfem
This is just an advisory message noting that we've got some upgrades
waiting in experimental (or soon to be there), that conflict with
unstable:
- superLU 5.2
- PETSc 3.7 (and SLEPc 3.7)
The conflicts are:
- petsc 3.6 won't build against superLU 5.2 [1]
- dolfin 1.6 won't buil
Surely you all give a whoop yourselves every time you get that email,
"libcool_1.3.dfsg1-4_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable"
:)
On Mon, 2016-05-30 at 08:51 +0100, Ghislain Vaillant wrote:
> On 30/05/16 00:18, Jonathon Love wrote:
> > On 28/05/2016 19:58, Nico Schlömer wrote:
> > > Whoop, wh
On 30/05/16 00:18, Jonathon Love wrote:
On 28/05/2016 19:58, Nico Schlömer wrote:
Whoop, whoop [1].
*chuckles*, i'm not accustomed to such levity on d-science!
thanks nico.
jonathon
It's refreshing.
Good work guys.
Ghis
On 28/05/2016 19:58, Nico Schlömer wrote:
Whoop, whoop [1].
*chuckles*, i'm not accustomed to such levity on d-science!
thanks nico.
jonathon
Whoop, whoop [1].
[1] https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/superlu_5.2.1+dfsg1-1~exp1.html
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 6:37 AM Drew Parsons wrote:
> Thanks Nico. I'll upload it as soon as I get a spare moment.
>
> Drew
>
> On Thu, 2016-05-26 at 20:49 +, Nico Schlömer wrote:
> > Done.
> > --Nico
>
Thanks Nico. I'll upload it as soon as I get a spare moment.
Drew
On Thu, 2016-05-26 at 20:49 +, Nico Schlömer wrote:
> Done.
> --Nico
>
> On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 10:46 PM Graham Inggs
> wrote:
> > I think Lintian now also complains that git:// is not secure, so I
> > suggest changing:
> >
Done.
--Nico
On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 10:46 PM Graham Inggs wrote:
> I think Lintian now also complains that git:// is not secure, so I
> suggest changing:
>
> Vcs-Git: git://anonscm.debian.org/debian-science/packages/superlu.git
>
> to:
>
> Vcs-Git:
> https://anonscm.debian.org/git/debian-scienc
> I'm used to seeing the second one, but I'll roll with the one you prefer.
The second one is actually a bit nicer, so I changed that.
> I think I'll upload to experimental first (tomorrow)
A sensible decision.
Cheers,
Nico
On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 5:51 PM Drew Parsons wrote:
> Thanks Nico.
>
Thanks Nico.
Weird, they've given us 2 web interfaces, your
https://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=debian-science/packages/superlu.git
and also
https://anonscm.debian.org/git/debian-science/packages/superlu.git
(or 3 if you count
http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/debian-science/packages/superlu.g
> please update the vcs fields in debian/control to point to the new git
repo.
Check.
Cheers,
Nico
On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 4:35 AM Drew Parsons wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-05-25 at 12:37 +, Nico Schlömer wrote:
> > There probably isn't much awareness about these copyright issues
> > upstream, so
On Wed, 2016-05-25 at 12:37 +, Nico Schlömer wrote:
> There probably isn't much awareness about these copyright issues
> upstream, so the best thing for us might be to stick to what we
> already had. (After all, the old license statements are still there,
> too.)
Agreed. Let's keep listing the
There probably isn't much awareness about these copyright issues upstream,
so the best thing for us might be to stick to what we already had. (After
all, the old license statements are still there, too.)
I've fixed the last lintian nag now and I think it's all good to go.
Cheers,
Nico
On Mon,
elease. Removing those do not
> prevent from using SuperLU itself; those add-ons are secondary
> functionalities.
>
> Sherry Li
>
>
> On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Drew Parsons
> wrote:
> > Dear Dr Li,
> >
> > thank you for maintaining the SuperLU code.
The simplest solution is this, whatever is not BSD, you can remove the use
path, not to include in your release. Removing those do not prevent from
using SuperLU itself; those add-ons are secondary functionalities.
Sherry Li
On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Drew Parsons wrote:
> Dear Dr
Dear Dr Li,
thank you for maintaining the SuperLU code. We're preparing to update
to the latest version in the Debian GNU/Linux project.
We noticed some licence changes in v5.2.1 and wanted to draw your
attention to some discrepancies which have concerned us.
The licence for your own Su
On Mon, 2016-05-23 at 11:54 +, Nico Schlömer wrote:
> > That's dodgy how upstream handled the non-free in MATLAB/time.m.
> All
> they did was delete Mathwork's copyright statement. It's on their
> head.
>
> Indeed. All files that are listed as exceptions from the BSD license
> (except mc64ad.
rew Parsons > > org>
> > > >>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>> On Fri, 2016-05-20 at 11:00 +, Nico Schlömer wrote:
> > > >>>>>>> More important is that some dfsg files are still in the git
> > > >>>>> tree.
> > > &g
:00 +, Nico Schlömer wrote:
> > >>>>>>> More important is that some dfsg files are still in the git
> > >>>>> tree.
> > >>>>>>> MATLAB/{spypart.m,time.m} and DOC/*ug.pdf.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>&g
binary
> >>>>> program.
> >>>>> Just as we need the source for binary files, for the same reason
> >>>>> we
> >>>>> want the source (the latex files) for the pdf files.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>&
n -i superlu_5.2.0+dfsg1-1_amd64.changes
There's a handful of warnings, have a go at fixing them:
W: superlu source: dep5-copyright-license-name-not-unique
(paragraph at line 109)
There are 2 licence short-names "permissive". Give one a distinct
short name from the other. permiss
>
>> > >
>> > > > Unfortunately, I have no experience with automatically creating
>> > > dfsg
>> > > > tarballs, and there's a fair chance I'll do it incorrectly. I'd
>> > > > appreciate if someone could take over
gt; Unfortunately, I have no experience with automatically creating
> > > dfsg
> > > > tarballs, and there's a fair chance I'll do it incorrectly. I'd
> > > > appreciate if someone could take over from here.
> > >
> > > I've tidied
there's a fair chance I'll do it incorrectly. I'd
> > > appreciate if someone could take over from here.
> >
> > I've tidied up the dfsg handling, listing the reject files in
> > debian/copyright.
> >
> > The package builds fine (and p
ld take over from here.
>
> I've tidied up the dfsg handling, listing the reject files in
> debian/copyright.
>
> The package builds fine (and petsc3.7 seems happy with it).
>
> The last step is to check lintian,
> lintian -i superlu_5.2.0+dfsg1-1_amd64.changes
>
a handful of warnings, have a go at fixing them:
W: superlu source: dep5-copyright-license-name-not-unique (paragraph at line
109)
There are 2 licence short-names "permissive". Give one a distinct
short name from the other. permissive-colamd or something.
W: superlu source: ancient-s
> More important is that some dfsg files are still in the git tree.
> MATLAB/{spypart.m,time.m} and DOC/*ug.pdf.
Aha yes. (Is the user guide really nonfree?)
Unfortunately, I have no experience with automatically creating dfsg
tarballs, and there's a fair chance I'll do it incorrectly. I'd apprec
On Fri, 2016-05-20 at 09:49 +, Nico Schlömer wrote:
> I've pushed some more changes to [1] (including a patch) and it's now
> compiling and installing alright. I guess a review would be in order.
>
> Cheers,
> Nico
>
> [1] alioth:/git/debian-science/packages/superlu.git
Thanks Nico.
I sugg
s Nico. I'll start petsc 3.7 in the NEW queue, so
> once it and superlu 5.2 both pass NEW, we can rebuild petsc with
> superlu support back in.
>
> Drew
>
>
> On Thu, 2016-05-19 at 23:54 +, Nico Schlömer wrote:
> > Thanks for the hints; I've put it on [1] comple
Great work, thanks Nico. I'll start petsc 3.7 in the NEW queue, so
once it and superlu 5.2 both pass NEW, we can rebuild petsc with
superlu support back in.
Drew
On Thu, 2016-05-19 at 23:54 +, Nico Schlömer wrote:
> Thanks for the hints; I've put it on [1] complete with
uickly, I'll include the
corresponding patches. Also, if we could convince the maintainers to remove
the nonfree part of the code [3], the scripts would get even simpler.
Cheers,
Nico
[1] alioth:/git/debian-science/packages/superlu.git
[2] https://github.com/xiaoyeli/superlu/pulls
[3] ht
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 02:17:42PM +, Nico Schlömer wrote:
> I've imported the repo into [1] where I'll do some work,
it's missing the pristine-tar branch.
Please also import the pristine-tar details into the repository. Given
that apparently your gbp config doesn't have 'pristine-tar = True'
I've imported the repo into [1] where I'll do some work, later this week we
can move it to alioth.
Cheers,
Nico
[1] https://github.com/nschloe/debian-superlu
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 3:34 PM Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 01:14:38PM +, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
&g
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 01:14:38PM +, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 10:48:24AM +, Nico Schlömer wrote:
> > @Mattia would you mind moving SuperLU over to /git?
>
> Conversion ongoing.
> Will notify once done.
Well, it has been super quick, probabl
[ keeping only the list in the recipients. But you did good at mailing
me explicitly, otherwise I'd have ignored this email ]
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 10:48:24AM +, Nico Schlömer wrote:
> @Mattia would you mind moving SuperLU over to /git?
Conversion ongoing.
Will notify o
ing to Git) a
Very good. If this gets moved over to Git, I'll be happy to create a
branch, get it to work, and have it reviewed by anyone.
@Mattia would you mind moving SuperLU over to /git?
Cheers,
Nico
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:39 PM Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi Nico,
>
> On
Hi Nico,
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 09:30:03AM +, Nico Schlömer wrote:
> > So if you have a real question rather than this meta-question you should
> ask it here.
>
> Yup, well, SuperLU in Debian is pretty outdated and the new version allows
> for a much simpler build proces
Thanks for the info!
> So if you have a real question rather than this meta-question you should
ask it here.
Yup, well, SuperLU in Debian is pretty outdated and the new version allows
for a much simpler build process. The debian config can probably be
improved. I was going to ask how this co
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 10:18:23AM +0200, Johannes Ring wrote:
> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Nico Schlömer
> wrote:
> > Does anyone know who is the current maintainer for SuperLU [1] and where to
> > find the debian repo?
>
> The maintainer is Debian Science Maintai
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Nico Schlömer wrote:
> Does anyone know who is the current maintainer for SuperLU [1] and where to
> find the debian repo?
The maintainer is Debian Science Maintainers and the debian repo is
available in debian-science svn repo:
http://anonscm.debian.org/
Hi everyone,
Does anyone know who is the current maintainer for SuperLU [1] and where to
find the debian repo?
Cheers,
Nico
[1] https://packages.debian.org/source/sid/superlu
45 matches
Mail list logo
