Re: Packaging parsnp and harvest-tools for Debian
Hi Todd,
On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 07:11:28AM -0400, Todd Treangen wrote:
>
> >We intend to package parsnp[1] and when downloading the archive from
> >Github[2] I realised that it contains some binaries we need to replace
> >by Debian packaged binaries built from the according sources to enable a
> >distribution in main Debian.
>
> fantastic! one question I have; I'm working on a new release that
> addresses a few important issues and will add a couple of new
> features. I'm not sure on the timing of this, but hope to get it out
> soon. If this is after it is integrated into Debian, how difficult is
> it to replace/update to the latest version?
Once a package made it into Debian its in most cases a matter of
15-30min work to get the update prepared. So in our specific case it
makes sense to package the current version (with the initial packaging
work on my side + waiting for the initial acceptance on the Debian
mirror) and upgrade once you have released the new version.
> >However, when calling bin/harvest_linux and the result from packaging
> >the output is different:
>
> harvesttools is the correct one to use; harvest_linux can we replaced
> with a build of harvesttools source
OK.
> >Moreover I wonder where I can find the source for bin/Profile
>
> agreed, the name is quite generic; no problem to rename if necessary.
It would be great if you would come up with a renaing suggestion
to make sure we do not invent some name you don't like.
> http://www.maths.otago.ac.nz/~dbryant/software/PhiPack.tar
Is there any *versioned* tarball and some kind of web page that could be
considered a "homepage" which we usually add to our metadata?
> >Finally you are shipping a copy of libMUSCLE[5] which has three changes
> >applied
>
> yes, that is correct
>
> >I think upstream of libMUSCLE would be happy to profit from these
> >changes as well.
>
> ok, alternatively, I was intending to set the max_thread_count to the
> maximum available threads on a system. I was unable to successfully
> implement this change (via omp_get_thread_num()), so instead, set
> this to a large value (64). thoughts/recommendations?
This mail goes in CC to our mailing list. May be there are
some ideas.
> >I plan to apply these to the official Debian package
> >since it seems sensible to me and link parsnp against this library
> >dynamically.
>
> agreed, this makes sense
OK.
> >What do you think?
>
> all of this sounds great, thanks again for your time/effort getting
> parsnp packaged into Debian.
You are welcome - thanks for providing parsnp as free software
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: