Re: 2.9.5 and 2.1.73

[Rafael Laboissiere]

* John W. Eaton <address@hidden> [2006-03-16 11:58]:

>   50_g++4.1.dpatch
>   50_glpk-sparse.dpatch
>   50_inferior-octave-resync-dirs.dpatch
>   50_install-liboctinterp.dpatch
>   50_octave-mod-bind-m-bs-2.9.dpatch
> 
> I think these have all been applied to the 2.9.x branch.
> 
> 
>   50_mkoctfile.1-no-negative.dpatch
> 
> I don't recall seeing anything about this one, so if you think it
> needs to be applied, can you please forward the report(s) that
> resulted in the patch?

Colin Ingram is responsible for this patch.  I am Cc:ing this message to
him.  [Colin: here is the context of this message is:
http://www.octave.org/mailing-lists/octave-maintainers/2006/455]

>   50_octave-value-list-resize-2.9.dpatch
> 
> I don't plan to make this change since I think we determined that the
> problem was due to a compiler bug, and I think that has since been
> fixed.

This one is already applied to CVS HEAD.

>   70_octave-mod-honor-auto-indent.dpatch
> 
> The code in the current octave-mod.el file seems different now, so I
> don't know whether this patch is still needed.

I will check whether this one is still necessary.

> I didn't check the 2.1 branch.  If you think it is important to
> include any of these, then please check the 2.1.x branch of the cvs
> archive (the tag is ss-2-1-63-patches) and let me know whether they
> are needed.

There are only for patches for the octave2.1 Debian package:

    50_inferior-octave-resync-dirs

This one is related to the compiler bug problem you mentioned. 

    50_octave-value-list-resize-2.1
    50_octave-mod-bind-m-bs-2.1

These two are not in ss-2-1-63-patches.  I think they should go in.

    50_g++4.1

This one is already applied to the ss-2-1-63-patches branches.

-- 
Rafael