[Top][All Lists]

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

[Axiom-developer] Debian Axiom package

From: Camm Maguire
Subject: [Axiom-developer] Debian Axiom package
Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 21:10:20 -0400
User-agent: SEMI/1.14.3 (Ushinoya) FLIM/1.14.3 (Unebigory ōmae) APEL/10.3 Emacs/21.2 (i386-debian-linux-gnu) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI)


OK, trial packages are now at=20

snapshot taken at 20040517.  Please check them out all who are
interested and provide feedback if any.  These are most likely the
versions that will be in the next Debian release ("sarge").

Please keep in mind that while the division is not set in stone
(especially 'axiom-tex'), most of it is required to satisfy Debian
policy, which mandates that significant binary-independent data be
stored in /usr/share in a separate binary independent package.

Another item which I've included, though am not yet fully committed
to, is a little helper script to rerun the test suite on the users
fresh install should they desire, together with the concatenated
.output files generated at build time.

One item not currently in which might be a good idea is to run the
build twice after the .fn files have been generated.

Fr=E9d=E9ric Lehobey <address@hidden> writes:

> Dear Camm,
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 02:40:55PM -0400, Camm Maguire wrote:
> > Greetings!
> >=20
> > Along these lines, I'd just like to note that the 01/30 axiom snapshot
> > has just entered Debian testing.
>   Congratulations and thanks a lot!=20
> >                                   Had to hand compile on alpha to get
> > around a libc6.1 bug which apparently will not be fixed soon.
>   Which one is it?  Have you its number around.

221969, now fixed, thankfully!

> > As earlier stated, I'd like to get another snapshot in before the
> > Debian 'sarge' release is finalized.  Toward this end, I think the
> > axiom package needs splitting, at the very least due to the Debian
> > policy requirements that arch-dependent (e.g. .o files) and
> > arch-independent (e.g. source files and docs) data needs to be
> > separated.
> >=20
> > As I know there are quite a few Debian axiom users here, I thought I'd
> > solicit opinions on a binary package structure.  Perhaps at least
> > axiom, axiom-doc and  axiom-source.
>   That would be great.  Could we even have axiom package suggest
> axiom-source? (or maybe an intermediate [axiom-spad?] package
> recommended by axiom that would provide the .spad files extracted from
> the original sources .spad.pamphlet).

Yes, axiom now recommends axiom-source.

>   You mentioned earlier to me having already long ago solved bug
> #237634 in your personal cvs tree.  Is this cvs repository publicly
> available?  If not, would you mind providing some (read) access to it

This fix is in the latest packages.

> as is doing, for example, David Mentr=E9 with his code (by using arch,
> not cvs, and for development, not packaging) at
> <>.  I am currently
> learning how to produce Debian packages, and been able to lurk at the
> way your are preparing your packaging would be to me a great
> incitement to help you debugging (and porting) and (hopefully some
> day) provide relevant patches (I have great interest in Axiom though
> not yet been able to spend on it as much time as I would like to).

Looking at debian/rules is the best way to get started, IMHO.

> Thanks for all your work,
> Fr=E9d=E9ric Lehobey
Camm Maguire                                            address@hidden
"The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens."  --  Baha'u'llah

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]