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

[Pkg-octave-devel] Bug#367165: marked as done (octave2.1: please put runtime libraries in /usr/lib, not /usr/lib/octave-VERSION)

Your message dated Sun, 15 Mar 2009 08:14:24 GMT
with message-id <200903150814.n2F8EOoD005113@kmos.homeip.net>
and subject line octave2.1 has been removed from Debian, closing #367165
has caused the Debian Bug report #367165,
regarding octave2.1: please put runtime libraries in /usr/lib, not /usr/lib/octave-VERSION
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.)


-- 
367165: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=367165
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: octave2.1
Version: 1:2.1.73-8
Severity: wishlist

octave puts three shared libraries in /usr/lib/octave-VERSION rather than
give them proper sonames.

$ ldd /usr/bin/octave-2.1.73
        linux-gate.so.1 =>  (0xffffe000)
        liboctinterp.so => /usr/lib/octave-2.1.73/liboctinterp.so (0x411f2000)
        liboctave.so => /usr/lib/octave-2.1.73/liboctave.so (0x41923000)
        libcruft.so => /usr/lib/octave-2.1.73/libcruft.so (0x41000000)

The binary has an RPATH of /usr/lib/octave-2.1.73, so for most purposes
this causes no problems (except, of course, the problems associated with
having an RPATH at all), but it does cause prelink to barf.  It's also
inconsistent with the way things are done in the rest of the system.
It would be nice if these libraries moved to /usr/lib and grew proper
sonames -- there's nothing wrong with using 'liboctave.so.2.1.73' if
there is no ABI guarantee at all.

[If the only binary that is supposed to link these libraries is the
octave binary itself, though, it might make even more sense to link
them statically - I don't normally make this recommendation, but this
is a math toolkit and squeezing performance out matters.]

Will try to come up with a patch if I can find the time, but please
don't hold your breath, I have lots of other things on my plate.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell:  /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.16-1-686-smp
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968)

Versions of packages octave2.1 depends on:
ii  atlas3-base [liblapack.s 3.6.0-20        Automatically Tuned Linear Algebra
ii  fftw3                    3.0.1-14        library for computing Fast Fourier
ii  lapack3 [liblapack.so.3] 3.0.20000531a-6 library of linear algebra routines
ii  libc6                    2.3.6-7         GNU C Library: Shared libraries
ii  libgcc1                  1:4.1.0-4       GCC support library
ii  libgfortran0             4.0.3-3         Runtime library for GNU Fortran ap
ii  libhdf5-serial-1.6.5-0 [ 1.6.5-2         Hierarchical Data Format 5 (HDF5) 
ii  libncurses5              5.5-2           Shared libraries for terminal hand
ii  libreadline5             5.1-7           GNU readline and history libraries
ii  libstdc++6               4.1.0-4         The GNU Standard C++ Library v3
ii  texinfo                  4.8.dfsg.1-1    Documentation system for on-line i
ii  zlib1g                   1:1.2.3-11      compression library - runtime

octave2.1 recommends no packages.

-- no debconf information

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Version: 1:2.1.73-19+rm

The octave2.1 package has been removed from Debian so we are closing
the bugs that were still opened against it.

For more information about this package's removal, read
http://bugs.debian.org/516402 . That bug might give the reasons why
this package was removed, and suggestions of possible replacements.

Don't hesitate to reply to this mail if you have any question.

Thank you for your contribution to Debian.

Kind regards,
--
Marco Rodrigues

--- End Message ---
Reply to: