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

Re: ongoing slepc/petsc transition

Hello Anton,

On Sat, 2012-02-25 at 15:41 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Hi,
> Anton Gladky <gladky.anton@gmail.com> (25/02/2012):
> > is there a chance to get petsc in testing in a near future?
> > gmsh was removed from wheezy because of petsc.
> as explained by Julien in [1], we had to remove it to let hdf5 go
> forward. If you need any help to get petsc back into testing, please
> let us (debian-release) know.
>  1. http://lists.debian.org/debian-qa-packages/2012/02/msg00221.html

I think the first step is to complete the mumps transition [1] for which
coinor-ipopt seems to be the main obstacle, with an RC bug [2].

 [1] http://release.debian.org/transitions/html/mumps.html
 [2] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=659898

When MUMPS goes in, then petsc and slepc go right in, along with
elmerfem, and a couple of others.

That said, the HDF5 transition seems a bit premature.  There are some
fundamental changes which have broken a couple of its reverse-depends,
which is one reason so many packages needed to be removed from testing
in order to transition it.

In particular, it's impossible to install hdf5-tools and
libhdf5-*mpi-dev at the same time, as is required to build a handful of
reverse-depends [3].  There's no reason the MPI and non-MPI shared libs
should conflict.

 [3] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=586149

Sorry I've been MIA for the past week, busy week at work.  I'll try to
get together patches for 586149 and 659898 so these things can move

GPG fingerprint: D54D 1AEE B11C CE9B A02B  C5DD 526F 01E8 564E E4B6

Engineering consulting with open source tools

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: