octave-dev

[OctDev] Using the package system

[H. <so...@ha...>]

Hi,
  Hopefully I'll get some spare time in a couple of days, so I'd like to
start converting Octave Forge to the package system which is included in
Octave 2.9.6 and later.
  Is anything happening in Octave Forge currently that I should have in
mind, when doing this transition?=20
  Should I just take a CVS snapshot and use that as my basis, or should
I do something else?

S=C3=B8ren

Re: [OctDev] Using the package system

[Paul K. <pki...@co...>]

On Aug 2, 2006, at 3:53 PM, S=F8ren Hauberg wrote:

> Hi,
>   Hopefully I'll get some spare time in a couple of days, so I'd like=20=

> to
> start converting Octave Forge to the package system which is included=20=

> in
> Octave 2.9.6 and later.
>   Is anything happening in Octave Forge currently that I should have =
in
> mind, when doing this transition?
>   Should I just take a CVS snapshot and use that as my basis, or =
should
> I do something else?

It's all clear from my end.

Don't bother with extra/mex --- it is going away.

- Paul

Re: [OctDev] Using the package system

[H. <so...@ha...>]

I did a CVS checkout this friday, and I have now moved main to the
package system. It was a fairly easy task that just required some manual
work. I'm having (configure) problems with comm, fixed, and
linear-algebra, but I also saw these errors when building the entire
octave-forge.

I would love to make the packages available to the rest of you, but my
webserver is giving me a hard time so I don't have a place to publish
the packages. Does anybody have a place where I can upload the packages?

So moving to the package system should be a trivial task, and we simply
need to decide when we do this.

S=C3=B8ren

ons, 02 08 2006 kl. 21:53 +0200, skrev S=C3=B8ren Hauberg:
> Hi,
>   Hopefully I'll get some spare time in a couple of days, so I'd like t=
o
> start converting Octave Forge to the package system which is included i=
n
> Octave 2.9.6 and later.
>   Is anything happening in Octave Forge currently that I should have in
> mind, when doing this transition?=20
>   Should I just take a CVS snapshot and use that as my basis, or should
> I do something else?
>=20
> S=C3=B8ren
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------=
--
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share=
 your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=3Djoin.php&p=3Dsourceforge&CID=3D=
DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> Octave-dev mailing list
> Oct...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev

Re: [OctDev] Using the package system

[Paul K. <pki...@co...>]

On Aug 6, 2006, at 5:04 AM, S=F8ren Hauberg wrote:
> So moving to the package system should be a trivial task, and we =
simply
> need to decide when we do this.

If you needed to change the package manager in order to make it work in
octave 2.9.7 then we will have to wait for the 2.9.8 release.

The octave-forge build/release infrastructure will need to be changed
to make the packages available individually and as one large download.
A convenience installer allowing the user to select the list of packages
to install would be nice. The extra and nonfree directories will need
to be packaged as well.

Any volunteers?

	- Paul

Re: [OctDev] Using the package system

[H. <so...@ha...>]

s=C3=B8n, 06 08 2006 kl. 07:27 -0400, skrev Paul Kienzle:
> If you needed to change the package manager in order to make it work in
> octave 2.9.7 then we will have to wait for the 2.9.8 release.
Wait before we make an octave-forge release, or wait before we check
changes into cvs?

> The octave-forge build/release infrastructure will need to be changed
> to make the packages available individually and as one large download.
When you say one large download, do you mean a large package (to be used
with the package manager) or a download that is installed in the regular
  ./configure; make; make install
way?

> A convenience installer allowing the user to select the list of package=
s
> to install would be nice.=20
Agreed, but that's a not a problem that needs solving right now.

> The extra and nonfree directories will need
> to be packaged as well.
This should be trivial (1-2 hours of work) and I'll do it soon.

> Any volunteers?
I'd love to help out, but I really don't know anything about autotools,
and I have a feeling that such skills will be needed.

S=C3=B8ren

Re: [OctDev] Using the package system

[Paul K. <pki...@co...>]

On Aug 7, 2006, at 1:34 PM, S=F8ren Hauberg wrote:

> s=F8n, 06 08 2006 kl. 07:27 -0400, skrev Paul Kienzle:
>> If you needed to change the package manager in order to make it work=20=

>> in
>> octave 2.9.7 then we will have to wait for the 2.9.8 release.
> Wait before we make an octave-forge release, or wait before we check
> changes into cvs?

If the current octave-forge works with 2.9.7 then you can start checking
in changes now.  Anybody tried it?

Otherwise wait for a new release.

>
>> The octave-forge build/release infrastructure will need to be changed
>> to make the packages available individually and as one large =
download.
> When you say one large download, do you mean a large package (to be=20
> used
> with the package manager) or a download that is installed in the=20
> regular
>   ./configure; make; make install
> way?

I mean some way to download and install a bundle of packages all at=20
once.
Presumably this would be a simple script that walks through every=20
package
in the tree and asked it to confirm its prerequisites, build, test, and
perhaps install while collecting a summary of the results to present to
the user when the process is complete.

>
>> A convenience installer allowing the user to select the list of=20
>> packages
>> to install would be nice.
> Agreed, but that's a not a problem that needs solving right now.
>
>> The extra and nonfree directories will need
>> to be packaged as well.
> This should be trivial (1-2 hours of work) and I'll do it soon.
>
>> Any volunteers?
> I'd love to help out, but I really don't know anything about =
autotools,
> and I have a feeling that such skills will be needed.

There shouldn't be any global autotools.  It should only be a matter of
asking each package to detect whether it's dependencies are met.  This
is currently encoded in the configure.add file.  There are some global
checks done in the top level configure which hopefully are no longer
needed.

- Paul=

Re: [OctDev] Using the package system

[Quentin S. <qsp...@ie...>]

Paul Kienzle wrote:
> On Aug 7, 2006, at 1:34 PM, S=F8ren Hauberg wrote:
>
>  =20
>> s=F8n, 06 08 2006 kl. 07:27 -0400, skrev Paul Kienzle:
>>    =20
>>> If you needed to change the package manager in order to make it work=20
>>> in
>>> octave 2.9.7 then we will have to wait for the 2.9.8 release.
>>>      =20
>> Wait before we make an octave-forge release, or wait before we check
>> changes into cvs?
>>    =20
>
> If the current octave-forge works with 2.9.7 then you can start checkin=
g
> in changes now.  Anybody tried it?
>  =20

Yes, I have released the current octave-forge in Fedora Extras with=20
octave 2.9.7. The only problem so far is a small bug in legend.m, which=20
I have fixed in CVS.

Quentin

Re: [OctDev] Using the package system

[H. <so...@ha...>]

Hi,

tir, 08 08 2006 kl. 08:35 -0500, skrev Quentin Spencer:
> Paul Kienzle wrote:
> > If the current octave-forge works with 2.9.7 then you can start check=
ing
> > in changes now.  Anybody tried it?  =20
>=20
> Yes, I have released the current octave-forge in Fedora Extras with=20
> octave 2.9.7. The only problem so far is a small bug in legend.m, which=
=20
> I have fixed in CVS.
So, I can start making changes in CVS? I need to be sure everybody is
fine with this because I need to make some minor changes in the
file/directory layout, that will break the build system.

The package system assumes that
* Files that can be directly installed (e.g. *.m files) are in a package
subdirectory called 'inst'.
* Files that need to be compiled are in a package subdirectory called
'src'.

So are everybody okay with me moving files around? If yes, then things
will be broken for a while...

S=C3=B8ren


> Quentin
>=20
>=20
>=20

Re: [OctDev] Using the package system

[Quentin S. <qsp...@ie...>]

S=C3=B8ren Hauberg wrote:

>Hi,
>
>tir, 08 08 2006 kl. 08:35 -0500, skrev Quentin Spencer:
> =20
>
>>Paul Kienzle wrote:
>>   =20
>>
>>>If the current octave-forge works with 2.9.7 then you can start checki=
ng
>>>in changes now.  Anybody tried it?  =20
>>>     =20
>>>
>>Yes, I have released the current octave-forge in Fedora Extras with=20
>>octave 2.9.7. The only problem so far is a small bug in legend.m, which=
=20
>>I have fixed in CVS.
>>   =20
>>
>So, I can start making changes in CVS? I need to be sure everybody is
>fine with this because I need to make some minor changes in the
>file/directory layout, that will break the build system.
>
>The package system assumes that
>* Files that can be directly installed (e.g. *.m files) are in a package
>subdirectory called 'inst'.
>* Files that need to be compiled are in a package subdirectory called
>'src'.
>
>So are everybody okay with me moving files around? If yes, then things
>will be broken for a while...
> =20
>

It's generally fine with me as long as the last release of octave-forge=20
still compiles with current 2.9.x octave versions. If there is a new=20
octave release that requires significant changes in octave-forge I will=20
want to see an octave-forge release. However, I think that's not so=20
likely since 2.9.x seems to be stabilizing a bit more now. So, unless=20
others object, I'd say go ahead and break things as long as they don't=20
stay broken for too long.

Quentin