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

Re: [Pkg-octave-devel] Packaging Octave 3.8



* Mike Miller <mtmiller@debian.org> [2013-12-30 15:51]:

Secondly, I've noticed that installed forge packages remain installed, but may not work with the updated octave packages. In particular, oct-files are no longer on the path. I don't know if this has been addressed previously, call for a binnmu on all forge packages?

Thanks for reporting this problem.

All forge packages that contain *.oct files were built for api-v48+. Version 3.8* of the octave package will break them because it has api-49+. Some kind of relationship (like Breaks, but I am not sure) should be added to the new octave package.

The list of relationships with the forge packages in unstable can be built with this:

    for p in $(apt-file find api-v48+ | cut -f1 -d: | sort | uniq) ; do echo $p "(<=" $(apt-cache show $p/unstable | grep Version: | sed 's/Version: //')")" ; done

Which yields, currently:

    octave-audio (<= 1.1.4-4)
    octave-communications (<= 1.2.0-1)
    octave-control (<= 2.6.1-1)
    octave-econometrics (<= 1:1.1.1-2)
    octave-general (<= 1.3.2-2)
    octave-geometry (<= 1.7.0-1)
    octave-gsl (<= 1.0.8-5)
    octave-image (<= 2.0.0-3)
    octave-io (<= 1.2.5-1)
    octave-java (<= 1.2.9-2)
    octave-linear-algebra (<= 2.2.0-1)
    octave-miscellaneous (<= 1.2.0-2)
    octave-nan (<= 2.5.5-2)
    octave-nurbs (<= 1.3.7-1)
    octave-ocs (<= 0.1.3-1)
    octave-octcdf (<= 1.1.6-1)
    octave-octgpr (<= 1.2.0-3)
    octave-odepkg (<= 0.8.4-1)
    octave-openmpi-ext (<= 1.1.1-1)
    octave-optim (<= 1.2.2-2)
    octave-optiminterp (<= 0.3.4-1)
    octave-plplot (<= 5.9.9-5+b1)
    octave-quaternion (<= 2.0.3-1)
    octave-secs1d (<= 0.0.9-2)
    octave-secs2d (<= 0.0.8-4)
    octave-signal (<= 1.2.2-1)
    octave-sockets (<= 1.0.8-1)
    octave-specfun (<= 1.1.0-1)
    octave-strings (<= 1.1.0-1)
    octave-struct (<= 1.0.10-1)
    octave-symbolic (<= 1.1.0-2)
    octave-tsa (<= 4.2.4+dfsg-1)

Rafael




Reply to: