[gentoo-science] How to use glpk-4.50

[gentoo-science] How to use glpk-4.50

[Thomas Kahle]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 416 bytes --]

Hi,

I'm trying to figure out how to use the latest glpk-4.50 ( and how to
solve https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=473380 )

So, the configure test fails because the symbols LPX, lpx, etc. are not
known?  Have they moved to some other header?  Since these are just the
basic linear program datatypes I'm slightly confused.  Does anybody know
what's going on?

Thanks,
Thomas

-- 
Thomas Kahle


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 381 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-science] How to use glpk-4.50

[fbissey]

Quoting Thomas Kahle <tomka@gentoo.org>:

> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to figure out how to use the latest glpk-4.50 ( and how to
> solve https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=473380 )
>
> So, the configure test fails because the symbols LPX, lpx, etc. are not
> known?  Have they moved to some other header?  Since these are just the
> basic linear program datatypes I'm slightly confused.  Does anybody know
> what's going on?
>

Hi Thomas,

I have very much explained what's going on in this bug:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=473454

But to summarize: in glpk 4.49 lpx_ symbols have been removed. Not moved, they
were probably deprecated for a while.
It affects cvxopt and ppl as well - there may be more. Octave and sage are
unaffected

If you check out the git tree from ppl you can see what they have done 
in May to
solve the problem on their side.

I personally think glpk 4.50 should be masked until we have some resolution on
all these.

Francois

Re: [gentoo-science] How to use glpk-4.50

[Sébastien Fabbro]

On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:19 PM,  <fbissey@slingshot.co.nz> wrote:

>
> I personally think glpk 4.50 should be masked until we have some resolution
> on
> all these.
>

it is masked.

Re: [gentoo-science] How to use glpk-4.50

[fbissey]

Quoting Sébastien Fabbro <bicatali@gentoo.org>:

> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:19 PM,  <fbissey@slingshot.co.nz> wrote:
>
>>
>> I personally think glpk 4.50 should be masked until we have some resolution
>> on
>> all these.
>>
>
> it is masked.

Sorry for the noise I didn't notice. You didn't make any noise about it on the
bugs I am copied too.

Francois

Re: [gentoo-science] How to use glpk-4.50

[Thomas Kahle]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 596 bytes --]



On 06/24/2013 11:25 PM, Sébastien Fabbro wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:19 PM,  <fbissey@slingshot.co.nz> wrote:
> 
>>
>> I personally think glpk 4.50 should be masked until we have some resolution
>> on
>> all these.
>>
> 
> it is masked.

... and that is irrelavant from a dev perspective.  People report bugs
and we have to come up with solutions.  The mask just makes the problem
less urgent.

Knowing 4ti2's upstream I doubt that there ever will be a patch for
4ti2.  Nobody touches that part of the code and nobody does maintenance
anyway.

-- 
Thomas Kahle


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 381 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-science] How to use glpk-4.50

[Sébastien Fabbro]

On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:48 PM, Thomas Kahle <tomka@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> it is masked.
>
> ... and that is irrelavant from a dev perspective.  People report bugs
> and we have to come up with solutions.  The mask just makes the problem
> less urgent.
>

we do not have to come up with solutions for glpk api breaks. i could
have simply not bump glpk in the tree and there will be no bugs.
masking or subslot dependencies is what we can do without diving into
upstream code. obviously patches are welcome.

Re: [gentoo-science] How to use glpk-4.50

[fbissey]

Quoting Sébastien Fabbro <bicatali@gentoo.org>:

> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:48 PM, Thomas Kahle <tomka@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>> it is masked.
>>
>> ... and that is irrelavant from a dev perspective.  People report bugs
>> and we have to come up with solutions.  The mask just makes the problem
>> less urgent.
>>
>
> we do not have to come up with solutions for glpk api breaks. i could
> have simply not bump glpk in the tree and there will be no bugs.
> masking or subslot dependencies is what we can do without diving into
> upstream code. obviously patches are welcome.

Looking at 4ti2 in particular, that's a substantial amount of code. If you
fix it, that would pretty much get you ownership of it, but I see you already
have a fork on github with a few commits, Thomas.

So you are after glpk documentation on how to migrate? I haven't seen anything
useful on glpk's mailing list but it wouldn't hurt to ask there.

Francois

Re: [gentoo-science] How to use glpk-4.50

[Thomas Kahle]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1254 bytes --]



On 06/25/2013 12:16 AM, fbissey@slingshot.co.nz wrote:
> Quoting Sébastien Fabbro <bicatali@gentoo.org>:
> 
>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:48 PM, Thomas Kahle <tomka@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>> it is masked.
>>>
>>> ... and that is irrelavant from a dev perspective.  People report bugs
>>> and we have to come up with solutions.  The mask just makes the problem
>>> less urgent.
>>>
>>
>> we do not have to come up with solutions for glpk api breaks. i could
>> have simply not bump glpk in the tree and there will be no bugs.
>> masking or subslot dependencies is what we can do without diving into
>> upstream code. obviously patches are welcome.
> 
> Looking at 4ti2 in particular, that's a substantial amount of code. If you
> fix it, that would pretty much get you ownership of it, but I see you
> already
> have a fork on github with a few commits, Thomas.

I was working on a different part of the code though.

> So you are after glpk documentation on how to migrate? I haven't seen
> anything
> useful on glpk's mailing list but it wouldn't hurt to ask there.

Yes, a migration guide would be useful, but then again, I'm not
interested in investing too much time into this.

Cheers,
Thomas

-- 
Thomas Kahle


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 381 bytes --]