From: VulK <etn45p4m@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-science@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-science] sage queues
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 23:24:45 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110812032445.GA29583@mistaya.nunet.neu.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110809172110.f52ccoc4s0kcok8s@webmail.slingshot.co.nz>
* fbissey@slingshot.co.nz <fbissey@slingshot.co.nz> [2011-08-09 17:21:10]:
> Quoting VulK <etn45p4m@gmail.com>:
>
> > Hi,
> > Thank you for the explanation: I kind of guessed that some part of sage were
> > omitted to adapt the two packaging system but your explanation gave me the
> > details I was missing.
> > As you said the combinat queue is/should be a real mess of continuous
> > updates (at least this is what I was told) so I am not entirely sure how well
> > an e-build would perform, in case you decide to spend some time on it I will
> > gladly be a guinea pig for testing it out.
> > I do not understand sage package system in details so my request may just be
> > stupid but is it possible to produce separate ebuilds for the different part
> > of sage that are now stripped? If not for all of those can this be
> > done for the
> > various packages in $SAGE_ROOT/devel ? If an e-build is not feasible, can
> > USE flags be used to select which extensions to include at compile time?
> >
> The details are a bit long to explain but everything provided by sage is
> currently split. Technically what is missing is some scripts from the spkg
> sage_scripts (provided by our sage-baselayout ebuild). Most of the files in
> $SAGE_LOCAL/bin of a vanilla install that starts with sage are provided
> by this
> spkg. And we omit a lot of them, some are already installed only on use flag
> request. We could add more if it was useful and feasible from a package
> management perspective.
>
> I must say that talking with sage-developers interested in sage installed with
> portage there is a possibility that some stuff may come back in some form once
> we figured it out.
Do you mean that in a distant future sage package system *might* become
portage?
> Something like sage -combinat creates a new sage branch.
> There is a possibility that we could allow such a branch to be created
> inside a
> user account (not system wide) and allow its use. But that's still some
> way off
> on my map. In fact it may come as a surprise to my fellow sage-on-gentoo devs.
>
> Francois
>
>
VulK
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-08-12 3:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-08-09 3:08 [gentoo-science] sage queues VulK
2011-08-09 4:29 ` fbissey
2011-08-09 5:07 ` VulK
2011-08-09 5:21 ` fbissey
2011-08-12 3:24 ` VulK [this message]
2011-08-12 3:38 ` fbissey
2011-08-09 11:46 ` Christopher Schwan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110812032445.GA29583@mistaya.nunet.neu.edu \
--to=etn45p4m@gmail.com \
--cc=gentoo-science@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox