[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#842821: marked as done (transition: hypre)

Your message dated Sat, 3 Dec 2016 12:34:17 +0100
with message-id <c23d9e5e-eed7-8ec7-f1e1-4a333868d00e@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#842821: transition: hypre
has caused the Debian Bug report #842821,
regarding transition: hypre
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
842821: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=842821
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition

I've worked to get an updated dolfin (python-dolfin) in the
archive. I've been upgrading the libraries it uses one by one.  petsc
is the important one.

But hypre (used by petsc) was quite old. It seemed dissonant to have
the other libraries updated while hypre was still old.

I've prepared an update for hypre 2.11.1, now uploaded to experimental
(i.e. currently in the NEW queue). 

I've confirmed petsc will build (and run) with the new hypre. i.e. I
have the patch for it ready.

elmer is the only other client with Build-Depends: libhypre-dev, but
it's failing to build anyway, regardless of any hypre upgrade. A new
version of elmer has been stuck in experimental for 3 years. The elmer
build configuration will need to recognise the new location of the
hypre headers in /usr/include/hypre.

code-aster-mpi-engine gets an indirect dependency on the hypre library
binary via petsc, so should not cause a problem.

Given the time needed to get through NEW, it may not be able to hit
unstable before 5 November, but I hope we can authorise this transition.



Ben file:

title = "hypre";
is_affected = .depends ~ "libhypre-2.8.0b" | .depends ~ "libhypre-2.11.1";
is_good = .depends ~ "libhypre-2.11.1";
is_bad = .depends ~ "libhypre-2.8.0b";


-- System Information:
Debian Release: stretch/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 4.7.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_AU.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_AU.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On 01/11/16 19:51, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> Control: tags -1 confirmed
> 
> On 01/11/16 15:07, Drew Parsons wrote:
>> Package: release.debian.org
>> Severity: normal
>> User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
>> Usertags: transition
>>
>> I've worked to get an updated dolfin (python-dolfin) in the
>> archive. I've been upgrading the libraries it uses one by one.  petsc
>> is the important one.
>>
>> But hypre (used by petsc) was quite old. It seemed dissonant to have
>> the other libraries updated while hypre was still old.
>>
>> I've prepared an update for hypre 2.11.1, now uploaded to experimental
>> (i.e. currently in the NEW queue). 
>>
>> I've confirmed petsc will build (and run) with the new hypre. i.e. I
>> have the patch for it ready.
>>
>> elmer is the only other client with Build-Depends: libhypre-dev, but
>> it's failing to build anyway, regardless of any hypre upgrade. A new
>> version of elmer has been stuck in experimental for 3 years. The elmer
>> build configuration will need to recognise the new location of the
>> hypre headers in /usr/include/hypre.
>>
>> code-aster-mpi-engine gets an indirect dependency on the hypre library
>> binary via petsc, so should not cause a problem.
>>
>> Given the time needed to get through NEW, it may not be able to hit
>> unstable before 5 November, but I hope we can authorise this transition.
> 
> Yes, this is fine. elmer is not in testing anyway, so there's basically one rdep
> and you maintain it. You can go ahead (after it clears NEW).

This is done.

Emilio

--- End Message ---
Reply to: