GNU Octave:

[Suresh Raja]

Could someone update the GNU Octave in the EPEL repository to the 
current version 3.6.4?

[Jon Ciesla]

On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Suresh Raja <sureshraja.cu(a)gmail.com&gt;wrote:

>  Could someone update the GNU Octave in the EPEL repository to the
> current
>  version 3.6.4?
>
>  ______________________________**_________________
>  epel-devel-list mailing list
>  epel-devel-list(a)redhat.com
>
> https://www.redhat.com/**mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-**list<https://ww...
>  
File a bug in BZ agains octave in EPEL.  Thanks!

-J

-- 
http://cecinestpasunefromage.wordpress.com/
------------------------------------------------
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love

-d. bowie

[Susi Lehtola]

Quoting Suresh Raja <sureshraja.cu(a)gmail.com&gt;:
>  Could someone update the GNU Octave in the EPEL repository to the  
>  current version 3.6.4? 
Can't. The EPEL6 branch is at 3.4.3, and a version upgrade is not
really allowed in the EPEL guidelines.

Once EPEL7 gets out, it will feature the then-newest version of Octave.
-- 
Susi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org

[Rex Dieter]

Susi Lehtola wrote:

>  
>  Quoting Suresh Raja
>  <sureshraja.cu(a)gmail.com&gt;:
> > Could someone update the GNU Octave in the EPEL repository to the
> > current version 3.6.4?
>  
>  Can't. The EPEL6 branch is at 3.4.3, and a version upgrade is not
>  really allowed in the EPEL guidelines. 
Why not?  
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#A_major_version_...

Only mentions ABI changes or incompabilities.  Is this newer version known 
to be incompatible in some way?

-- rex

[Orion Poplawski]

On 04/11/2013 05:24 PM, Rex Dieter wrote:
>  Susi Lehtola wrote:
>
> >
> > Quoting Suresh Raja
> > <sureshraja.cu(a)gmail.com&gt;:
> >> Could someone update the GNU Octave in the EPEL repository to the
> >> current version 3.6.4?
> >
> > Can't. The EPEL6 branch is at 3.4.3, and a version upgrade is not
> > really allowed in the EPEL guidelines.
>
>  Why not?
>  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#A_major_version_...
>
>  Only mentions ABI changes or incompabilities.  Is this newer version known
>  to be incompatible in some way?
>  
Yes, it is ABI in-compatible.


-- 
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager                     303-415-9701 x222
NWRA/CoRA Division                    FAX: [phone]
3380 Mitchell Lane                  orion(a)cora.nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301              http://www.cora.nwra.com

[Jonathan Underwood]

I'm not sure what that means for Octave, which is an interpreted language.
AFAIK, it would be unusual to be linking directly to Octave. So, I'm not
sure an ABI break is meaningful in this context. But, I'm not a big octave
user, so maybe I missed something.


On 12 April 2013 05:33, Orion Poplawski <orion(a)cora.nwra.com&gt; wrote:

>  On 04/11/2013 05:24 PM, Rex Dieter wrote:
>
> > Susi Lehtola wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Quoting Suresh Raja
> >> <sureshraja.cu(a)gmail.com&gt;:
> >>
> >>> Could someone update the GNU Octave in the EPEL repository to the
> >>> current version 3.6.4?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Can't. The EPEL6 branch is at 3.4.3, and a version upgrade is not
> >> really allowed in the EPEL guidelines.
> >>
> >
> > Why not?
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/**EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#A_**
> >
> major_version_update<http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndP...
> >
> > Only mentions ABI changes or incompabilities.  Is this newer version known
> > to be incompatible in some way?
> >
> >
>  Yes, it is ABI in-compatible.
>
>
>  --
>  Orion Poplawski
>  Technical Manager                     303-415-9701 x222
>  NWRA/CoRA Division                    FAX: [phone]
>  3380 Mitchell Lane                  orion(a)cora.nwra.com
>  Boulder, CO 80301              http://www.cora.nwra.com
>
>
>  ______________________________**_________________
>  epel-devel-list mailing list
>  epel-devel-list(a)redhat.com
>
> https://www.redhat.com/**mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-**list<https://ww...
>

[Orion Poplawski]

On 04/12/2013 07:33 AM, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
>  I'm not sure what that means for Octave, which is an interpreted
>  language. AFAIK, it would be unusual to be linking directly to Octave.
>  So, I'm not sure an ABI break is meaningful in this context. But, I'm
>  not a big octave user, so maybe I missed something. 
octave defines a module API version.  Binary modules compiled against 
one api will not load against a different version.  We encode this with:

octave(api) = api-v48+

3.4.3 provides:

octave(api) = api-v45+

There was also a soname bump between 3.4 and 3.6 in the octave libraries 
which a couple other packages other than octave modules also link to.

-- 
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager                     303-415-9701 x222
NWRA/CoRA Division                    FAX: [phone]
3380 Mitchell Lane                  orion(a)cora.nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301              http://www.cora.nwra.com