[Top][All Lists]

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

[bug#56729] [RFC PATCH 00/10] Add sagemath.

From: vicvbcun
Subject: [bug#56729] [RFC PATCH 00/10] Add sagemath.
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2022 15:40:53 +0200

On 2022-08-09T12:47:27+0200, Andreas Enge wrote:
> thanks for the update! I just pushed an update of maxima (and wxmaxima), but
> without your addition of ecl. Is there a good reason for this? In any case,
> this should be done in a separate commit, since it is not required for the
> update. For the record, I also tried to compile with gcl, but this still
> failed.
SageMath requires the FASL library? (I only know scheme) `maxima.fas'.
But it is only built when using ecl (See upstream here [0]). I don't
know if we need both sbcl and ecl. Arch uses both and puts the
lib/.../binary-* directories in separate packages[1], so maybe we could
use different outputs? Anyway, I have attached an rebased commit that
adds ecl.

> > > Concerning sagemath itself, below is my very old version of an attempt at
> > > packaging the library. Some things look reassuringly similar, my handling
> > > of the number of cores is less nice, but I do delete the bundled packages.
> > The `upstream' directory only seems to exist in the published tarball.
> > So this should be no problem if we build from git.
> Ah, interesting. Which one should we do? I personally tend to prefer tarballs
> (as the official distribution mechanism of the project). Recently there has
> been a preference in the Guix project for git repositories when autotools
> are involved, as they make it possible to recreate the configure scripts
> from their source. But since this is not the case here, the argument does
> not hold.
The sage tarball is 1.35 GiB while the repository is only about 440 MiB.
That seems quite convincing on its own.


Attachment: 0001-gnu-maxima-Build-with-ecl-and-install-maxima.fas.patch
Description: Text document

reply via email to

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