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

RE: Help packaging an octave toolbox



Terrific! Thank a lot for your support and patience!

 

Do I need to do anything regarding the RFS and ITP bugs associated with these finished packages? the list of those that have both ITP and RFS can be found at

 

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?submitter=fangqq%40gmail.com

 

Moving forward, I have 3 more packages to finish – all of them are Monte Carlo photon simulators (one of those – mcx – is CUDA based, and two others – mmc/mcxcl – are OpenCL based, each of them has an Octave mex-based toolbox). I am currently working on new upstream releases before making the packages.

 

I have two general questions

 

  1. Because libcudart is non-free, does that mean all software depends on it must be in non-free? If you are aware of any special requirements of such packages, feel free to let me know.
  2. I noticed that two of my executable names (mcx/mmc) have already been taken in Debian, does that mean I have to rename my executables? Or there are other ways to handle name conflicts?

 

Thanks again

 

Qianqian

 

From: Rafael Laboissière
Sent: Sunday, July 5, 2020 3:19 PM
To: Qianqian Fang
Cc: Debian Octave Group
Subject: Re: Help packaging an octave toolbox

 

* Qianqian Fang <fangqq@gmail.com> [2020-07-01 16:13]:

 

> On 7/1/20 8:35 AM, Rafael Laboissière wrote:

>> I think so.  If something goes weird, we can recreate the Git repository.

> 

> done. see

> 

> https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-octave-team/octave-iso2mesh

 

Looks good now.

 

> I added a symbolic link to tetgen because iso2mesh functions accepts

> both 'tetgen' and 'tetgen1.5'.

> 

> https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-octave-team/octave-iso2mesh/-/commit/50a2b5e3077fcaf1368b2206fb734a1cb846c49b

> 

> I am now getting a single warning

> 

> *W: iso2mesh-tools: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/tetgen1.5*

> 

> let me know if this can be ignored or also need to create a link to

> tetgen's manual?

> 

> also let me know if you see anything else that should be fixed.

 

I fixed this issue in commit 9d1c8eb.

 

I also fixed the Arch:all problem, in commit 0f715af.

 

I think that all new packages are ready now for the initial release.  I

will upload them to unstable soon.  They will go into the NEW queue, of

course.

 

Thanks for these contributions to the DOG.

 

Best,

 

Rafael

 


Reply to: