octave-maintainers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: /opt/octave_dev install prefix


From: Rik
Subject: Re: /opt/octave_dev install prefix
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:42:41 -0700

On 09/23/2016 09:00 AM, address@hidden wrote:
Subject:
Re: Octave 4.2.0 release candidate 2 available for ftp
From:
Abhinav Tripathi <address@hidden>
Date:
09/22/2016 11:47 PM
To:
"John W. Eaton" <address@hidden>
CC:
Octave Maintainers <address@hidden>
List-Post:
<mailto:address@hidden>
Precedence:
list
MIME-Version:
1.0
References:
<address@hidden>
In-Reply-To:
<address@hidden>
Message-ID:
<address@hidden>
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11443ad23b2588053d272727
Message:
3


On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 9:56 PM, John W. Eaton <address@hidden> wrote:
The second release candidate for Octave 4.2.0 is available from

  ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/octave

There may be some problems that need to be fixed so this version may not become the 4.2.0 release without some changes but I hope to not have more than one or two more release candidates before the 4.2.0 release is final.

Please try to build this version and report any problems you find in the bug tracker.  I've added a new version tag for the release candidate, so please use that when reporting problems.

In installer for Windows will be available from the same location once it is finished building and I've had a chance to test the installer and run the test suite.

jwe


Hi,
while trying to build the source on ubuntu 16.04, I get 2 warnings during 'sudo make install'  that "libinterp/***" was not installed in "/opt/octave_dev". Is this okay to continue? I did not get such warnings while compiling octave earlier.
I used "/opt/octave_dev" as prefix.
The make install succeeded and I can use octave without errors(as far as I can see).
.
Abhinav

I tried this on my Linux machine and it didn't give any errors.  Maybe there is just something weird with your local Linux configuration.  As long as 'make check' passes, we can probably ignore it.

--Rik 

reply via email to

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