Re: [Getfem-users] Ubuntu Packages

[Luis Saavedra]

Hi Kostas,

thanks for your work!!!

1) The folder superlu can be removed, and reemplaced:

* In debian: with package libsuperlu3 (or libsuperlu3-dev for 
build-package).
* In  the rest: with  http://crd.lbl.gov/~xiaoye/SuperLU/superlu_4.0.tar.gz

I think it would be a good idea create a branch dedicated to this issue.

2-3) in r3055, is this ok?

5) libgetfem, python-getfem, but  getfem4 don't exist yet.

Regards,
Luis

Konstantinos Poulios escribió:
> Hi all,
>
> The following bug report exists in Debian archive about the packaging 
> of getfem++:
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=453065
>
> The current work in Debian can be found here:
>
> http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-kde/krap/getfem%2B%2B/#_krap_getfem++_
> http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-kde/krap/getfem/#_krap_getfem_
>
> I've opened the following bug report in order to ask for the inclusion 
> of getfem++ in Ubuntu:
>
> https://launchpad.net/bugs/413165
>
> My current work on debianization of getfem++, including experimental 
> packages for ubuntu jaunty and karmic, can be found here:
>
> https://launchpad.net/~logari81/+archive/ppa 
> <https://launchpad.net/%7Elogari81/+archive/ppa>
>
> During the packaging process, several issues came up:
>
> 1. Licensing. In the attached file "getfem_license_exceptions" I ve 
> listed all licenses which differ from "LGPL 2.1 or later".
>  a) In the "tests-2.0", "tests", "internal_tools", "interface", 
> "contrib", "doc" and "superlu" folders, there are many source files 
> missing any license and copyright information.
>  b) Source files referring to "LGPL", "LGPL with incorrect FSF 
> address" and "LGPL (v2.1 or later) with missing copyright 
> information", can be found in "internal_tools", "interface" and 
> "contrib" folders. Probably most of the LGPL'ed files can be 
> relicensed to "LGPL 2.1 or later" since their authors are using this 
> LGPL version elsewhere.
>  c) In the "src" folder, there are double licensed gmm files, but this 
> is no problem for the packaging. One problem is the missing time 
> period specification for the contribution of Thorsten Ottosen.
>  d) Apparently, "superlu" belongs mostly to Xerox. I suppose that the 
> rest of the files in this folder missing a license declaration are 
> probably Xerox's contribution. Please complete the missing license 
> information.
>
> 2. The "configure" script generated with autoconf 2.64 is broken, as a 
> workaround, a blank line in "m4/ac_python_devel.m4" has been added 
> (see patch "ac_python_devel.patch"). Further investigation would be 
> necessary (probably an autoconf bug).
>
> 3. Using automake 1.11 installation with "make install" is broken. The 
> double entry for "check_all.sh" in 
> "interface/tests/matlab/Makefile.am" has been removed to fix the 
> problem (see patch tests_matlab_makefile.patch)
>
> 4. "autogen.sh" spooks many annoying warnings about "AC_CACHE_VAL" 
> (see the following build log 
> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/30384527/buildlog_ubuntu-karmic-i386.getfem%2B%2B_4.0~svn3053-0ubuntu0ppak9_FULLYBUILT.txt.gz 
> <http://launchpadlibrarian.net/30384527/buildlog_ubuntu-karmic-i386.getfem%2B%2B_4.0%7Esvn3053-0ubuntu0ppak9_FULLYBUILT.txt.gz>).
>
> 5. Names of the packages. I 've used the root "getfem" without "++" to 
> name the various packages in order to comply with the so-name of the 
> main library. I suppose this can be further discussed in debian and/or 
> ubuntu when the packages are considered to be accepted. Any remarks on 
> my choice are always welcome. (A bad example is the gmm standalone 
> package which in Debian is called libgmm++-dev whether in Ubuntu it is 
> named libgmm-dev).
>
> It would be very helpful to solve the issues 1-4 here in upstream 
> rather than in the packaging. It would also be nice to synchronize with
> http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-kde/krap/getfem%2B%2B/#_krap_getfem++_
> I hope my work can be somehow useful for Debian also.
>
> Regarding the functionality of the packages, up to now, I have only 
> tested the python interface, which seems to work fine. Any help with 
> testing the rest (i.e. the -dev packages) is welcome.
>
> Regards
>
> Kostas
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Getfem-users mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/getfem-users