gnuplot-py-users

[Gnuplot-py-users] Gnuplot.py version 1.7 has been released

[<kai...@t-...>]

Hi Everybody,

At long last, I have just released version 1.7 of Gnuplot.py.  You can 
get it at SourceForge,

    http://gnuplot-py.sourceforge.net/

This version doesn't contain any significant changes to what's been in 
CVS for quite a while; it's just that I finally made some time to 
package it up and release it :-|

I apologize for the things that didn't make it into the release.  If I 
had waited until everything was done, this release would have never 
gotten done.

Thanks everybody for your suggestions, feedback, and patches.

Highlights in this version:

  + Relaxed license from GPL to LGPL.

  + Added support for sending data to gnuplot via FIFOs (named pipes).
    This eliminates the ambiguity about when temporary files can be
    deleted, and thereby removes a common source of problems with
    Gnuplot.py.  Unfortunately, FIFOs only work under forms of unix.

  + Added preliminary support for running Gnuplot.py under Jython, the
    Java implementation of the Python language.  It partly works but
    depends on JNumeric, which is still beta-level.

  + Changed handling of 1-D arrays in the Data() function.  Now 1-D
    arrays are plotted as N points against the index number, rather than
    as 1 point with N coordinates.

Yours,
Michael

-- 
Michael Haggerty
mh...@al...

Re: [Gnuplot-py-users] Gnuplot.py version 1.7 has been released

[Leonardo M. <lm...@ud...>]

Congrats Michael, thanks a lot for taking the time !

Cheers,
-- leo

On Mon, 20 Oct 2003, Michael Haggerty wrote:

> Hi Everybody,
> 
> At long last, I have just released version 1.7 of Gnuplot.py.  You can 
> get it at SourceForge,
> 
>     http://gnuplot-py.sourceforge.net/

[Gnuplot-py-users] RPMS (Re: Gnuplot.py version 1.7 has been released)

[Leonardo M. <lm...@ud...>]

Hi Michael,

Does it make sense to provide RPMS in the sourceforge page? 
The distutils allow for almost automatic rpm building.

Here is a little diff:

#### patch begins
--- setup.cfg   2003-10-21 16:41:55.000000000 -0400
+++ setup.cfg.orig      2003-10-21 15:15:52.000000000 -0400
@@ -10,6 +10,4 @@
             LICENSE.txt
             Gnuplot.html
             doc/
-requires = _numpy.so, python >= 1.5
-vendor = gnuplot-py.sourceforge.net
#### patch ends

Just to add the dependency with python, numPy and to add a vendor.
Then you can run:
    python setup.py bdist --formats=rpm
and get a src.rpm and a noarch.rpm

Hope this helps,
-- Leo

> At long last, I have just released version 1.7 of Gnuplot.py.  You can 
> get it at SourceForge,
> 
>     http://gnuplot-py.sourceforge.net/

Re: [Gnuplot-py-users] RPMS (Re: Gnuplot.py version 1.7 has been released)

[<kai...@t-...>]

Hi,

Thanks for your suggestion and patch for generating an RPM for 
Gnuplot.py.  I included RPMs with the last release, and I realize that 
distutils makes it quite easy.  But:

1.  For what Python version should I provide RPMs?  The RPM is dependent 
on the Python version because that determines where the files are 
installed (/usr/lib/python1.5, /usr/lib/python2.2, etc).  I am not 
psyched about having to create RPMs for multiple Python versions, partly 
because I don't have all the versions installed myself.

2. Creating an RPM for Python 2.2 under RedHat is not entirely trivial, 
because under RedHat the Python 2.2 executable is called "python2", but 
distutils calls "python" for one of its internal processing steps. 
 (Obviously it wouldn't be too hard to work around this problem.)

3. Since there are no standard RPMs for Numeric (that I know of), it is 
not clear how to specify that dependency.  For example, since I have 
installed Numeric from source, I think that your suggested "requires = 
_numpy.so" wouldn't work on my system.

4. It is really easy for somebody to download the source tar file and 
create an RPM himself, then install the RPM.  This gives the benefit of 
RPM (e.g., being able to remove the package later) without some of the 
problems.  (I documented this procedure in README.txt.)

These arguments, and a tiny bit of laziness, led me to skip building RPMs.

How would you answer these questions (particularly the first one)?

Michael

Leonardo Milano wrote:

>Does it make sense to provide RPMS in the sourceforge page? 
>The distutils allow for almost automatic rpm building.
>  
>
-- 
Michael Haggerty
mh...@al...