Update to the latest release ... thoughts, ok...?
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/math/octave/Makefile,v
diff -u -p -r1.146 Makefile
--- Makefile10 Jan 2025 18:03:44 - 1.146
+++ Makefile13 May 2025 17:08:11 -
lgtm - ok volker@
On 2025-01-06 23:34, Steven Mestdagh wrote:
minor update, shows no regressions here on amd64.
any comments / ok?
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/math/octave/Makefile,v
diff -u -p -u -r1.144 Makefile
---
minor update, shows no regressions here on amd64.
any comments / ok?
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/math/octave/Makefile,v
diff -u -p -u -r1.144 Makefile
--- Makefile9 Dec 2024 18:58:50 - 1.144
+++ Makefile
On 2024-12-03 16:57, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2024/11/20 21:58, Volker Schlecht wrote:
Index: configure
--- configure.orig
+++ configure
I recommend patching the autoconf input file and regenerating configure
with autoconf. (I realise it's already done like that, but it could be
changed).
On 2024/11/20 21:58, Volker Schlecht wrote:
> Index: configure
> --- configure.orig
> +++ configure
I recommend patching the autoconf input file and regenerating configure
with autoconf. (I realise it's already done like that, but it could be
changed). It tends to result in less breakage in upd
Ping.
On 2024-11-24 22:53, Volker Schlecht wrote:
On 2024-11-24 19:49, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
+- canonical_host_type=$host
++ canonical_host_type=$host_cpu-$host_vendor-$host_os
Why this part?
configure --host=... should already set this. I removed this part
of the patch, ran config
On 2024-11-24 23:02, Kirill A. Korinsky wrote:
Maybe something like this? Probably it makes support much easy.
pre-configure:
@sed -i 's,readline,ereadline,g' ${WRKSRC}/configure
I leave that one to MAINTAINER. Personally, I'm not a fan of this approach,
though.
On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 22:53:57 +0100,
Volker Schlecht wrote:
>
> Index: configure
> --- configure.orig
> +++ configure
> -@@ -80591,7 +80591,7 @@ printf "%s\n" "$as_me: WARNING: $warn_rapidjson"
> >&2;}
> +@@ -82150,21 +82150,21 @@ fi
> + case "$found_dir" in
> + */$ac
On 2024-11-24 19:49, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
+- canonical_host_type=$host
++ canonical_host_type=$host_cpu-$host_vendor-$host_os
Why this part?
configure --host=... should already set this. I removed this part
of the patch, ran configure, and canonical_host_type was set to
"x86_64-unkn
Volker Schlecht:
> --- patches/patch-configure 24 Aug 2022 19:53:39 - 1.18
> +++ patches/patch-configure 20 Nov 2024 20:39:33 -
> @@ -1,9 +1,66 @@
> -Use GNU readline as our base readline lacks rl_prefer_env_winsize.
> +* Use GNU readline as our base readline lacks rl_prefer_env_w
Cc: naddy@, steven@
Alright, so here's the update to octave 9.2.0, switching to Qt6 and without
the OSREV bit in GNU_HOST (I renamed it because we're passing it to --host
in CONFIGURE_ARGS).
We're now down to only 3 non-expected test failures:
mapper.cc: That's due to our acos() implementation
Builds, installs and runs fine here on amd64 - which you already knew, I
guess ;-)
On 11/9/22 19:45, Steven Mestdagh wrote:
Below is a maintenance update for octave.
On amd64 it seems to be fine. The test suite gives the following result:
PASS17011
FAIL
Below is a maintenance update for octave.
On amd64 it seems to be fine. The test suite gives the following result:
PASS17011
FAIL 14
REGRESSION 6
XFAIL (reported bug) 33
SKIP (missing feature
Seems to be fine on amd64. The test suite results somewhat improved.
PASS16952
FAIL 18
REGRESSION 6
XFAIL (reported bug) 31
SKIP (missing feature)226
SKIP (run-time condition)
Le Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 11:59:07AM +0200, Volker Schlecht a écrit :
>
> > i've tried your diff and it fails to package here, some tests are
> > apparently installed in the wrong dir ?
>
> Ha ... yes, turns out I was missing a patch from upstream:
>
> https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/index.php?62295
Le Sat, Apr 16, 2022 at 10:11:11PM +0200, Volker Schlecht a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> so here's my shot at the octave update. There are some remaining failing
> tests (they have been failing in 5.2.0 as well), that are due to Octave
> banking on some specific behaviors of GNU libstdc++ ... (un)fortunately
Le Sat, Apr 16, 2022 at 10:11:11PM +0200, Volker Schlecht a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> so here's my shot at the octave update. There are some remaining failing
> tests (they have been failing in 5.2.0 as well), that are due to Octave
> banking on some specific behaviors of GNU libstdc++ ... (un)fortunately
On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 01:45:38PM +0200, Steven Mestdagh wrote:
> Stuart Henderson [2020-04-19, 22:24:32]:
> > On 2020/04/19 22:04, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > > On 2020/04/18 14:38, Steven Mestdagh wrote:
> > > > update octave, and reinstate wantlib that was somehow removed earlier.
> > > > teste
Stuart Henderson [2020-04-19, 22:24:32]:
> On 2020/04/19 22:04, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > On 2020/04/18 14:38, Steven Mestdagh wrote:
> > > update octave, and reinstate wantlib that was somehow removed earlier.
> > > tested lightly on amd64, test suite shows no regression compared to
> > > versio
On 2020/04/19 22:04, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2020/04/18 14:38, Steven Mestdagh wrote:
> > update octave, and reinstate wantlib that was somehow removed earlier.
> > tested lightly on amd64, test suite shows no regression compared to
> > version 5.1.0 in tree.
> >
> > please test/comment/ok.
>
On 2020/04/18 14:38, Steven Mestdagh wrote:
> update octave, and reinstate wantlib that was somehow removed earlier.
> tested lightly on amd64, test suite shows no regression compared to
> version 5.1.0 in tree.
>
> please test/comment/ok.
Not an Octave user and I can't really comment on whether
update octave, and reinstate wantlib that was somehow removed earlier.
tested lightly on amd64, test suite shows no regression compared to
version 5.1.0 in tree.
please test/comment/ok.
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/math/
On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 09:43:20PM +0100, Rafael Sadowski wrote:
> On Thu Feb 27, 2020 at 08:53:15AM +0100, Rafael Sadowski wrote:
> > This update fix my build issues with the upcoming Qt 5.13 update.
> >
> > Not check shared libs or runtime and will not. Steven do you have time
> > to take a look
On Thu Feb 27, 2020 at 08:53:15AM +0100, Rafael Sadowski wrote:
> This update fix my build issues with the upcoming Qt 5.13 update.
>
> Not check shared libs or runtime and will not. Steven do you have time
> to take a look?
>
> Rafael
>
Please forget the previous diff. This one fixes our curre
This update fix my build issues with the upcoming Qt 5.13 update.
Not check shared libs or runtime and will not. Steven do you have time
to take a look?
Rafael
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/math/octave/Makefile,v
retrievi
On Sat, May 04, 2019 at 12:20:09AM +0200, Steven Mestdagh wrote:
> updated diff against -current.
> any feedback on this?
Keeps working fine for me in light usage on amd64, OK kn.
Steven Mestdagh [2019-04-25, 07:53:23]:
> This brings octave to the latest version. Tested ok on amd64.
> Would be nice if someone could build/test on other archs.
updated diff against -current.
any feedback on this?
Index: Makefile
This brings octave to the latest version. Tested ok on amd64.
Would be nice if someone could build/test on other archs.
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/math/octave/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.108
diff -u -p -u -r1.108 M
On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 09:42:48PM +0100, Steven Mestdagh wrote:
> maintenance update, seems to work fine on amd64.
> test suite shows 2 failures less than with the previous version.
>
> comments / ok?
OK (with the fixes from kn@)
>
>
> Index: Makefile
> ===
On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 09:42:48PM +0100, Steven Mestdagh wrote:
> maintenance update, seems to work fine on amd64.
> test suite shows 2 failures less than with the previous version.
Keeps working fine on amd64, thanks.
> comments / ok?
$ portcheck
trailing whitespace in pkg/DESCR
maintenance update, seems to work fine on amd64.
test suite shows 2 failures less than with the previous version.
comments / ok?
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/math/octave/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.105
diff -u -p -u
this update seems to be working fine on amd64 so far.
please test / comment / ok.
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/math/octave/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.102
diff -u -p -u -r1.102 Makefile
--- Makefile25 Apr 2018 21
On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 08:53:49PM +0300, Paul Irofti wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 04, 2018 at 11:07:38AM +0300, Paul Irofti wrote:
> > I get this when runninng make with your diff:
> >
> > $ make update
> > Fatal: unknown keyword gcc in COMPILER (in math/octave)
> > *** Error 1 in /usr/ports/math/octave
On Wed, Apr 04, 2018 at 11:07:38AM +0300, Paul Irofti wrote:
> I get this when runninng make with your diff:
>
> $ make update
> Fatal: unknown keyword gcc in COMPILER (in math/octave)
> *** Error 1 in /usr/ports/math/octave
> (/usr/ports/infrastructure/mk/bsd.port.mk:3520 '.BEGIN': @exit 1)
Sor
I get this when runninng make with your diff:
$ make update
Fatal: unknown keyword gcc in COMPILER (in math/octave)
*** Error 1 in /usr/ports/math/octave
(/usr/ports/infrastructure/mk/bsd.port.mk:3520 '.BEGIN': @exit 1)
On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 11:25:52AM +0200, Steven Mestdagh wrote:
> please t
please test/comment/ok this update for octave.
it seems to work fine on amd64.
note that I've just committed a change to qrupdate that prevents octave
from linking in the g2c library and crashing on some computations.
Index: Makefile
==
On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 10:56:22AM +0100, Steven Mestdagh wrote:
> comments welcome.
Had a similar diff in openbsd-wip on github that did not work when gcc
was around. Looks like clang fixed that, OK!
>
>
> Index: Makefile
> ===
>
comments welcome.
can someone try to build this on something else than amd64?
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/math/octave/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.97
diff -u -p -u -r1.97 Makefile
--- Makefile30 Oct 2017 13:55:10
maintenance update, lightly tested on amd64.
please test on other archs if possible.
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/math/octave/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.83
diff -u -p -u -r1.83 Makefile
--- Makefile11 Mar 2016 2
seems to work ok on amd64. some feedback/tests on other architectures welcome.
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/math/octave/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.41
diff -u -r1.41 Makefile
--- Makefile9 Feb 2009 20:48:23 -
seems to work on amd64. please give it a try on some other archs.
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/math/octave/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.38
diff -u -r1.38 Makefile
--- Makefile1 Oct 2008 05:16:07 - 1.38
++
Daniel Dickman [2007-07-27, 01:56:52]:
> I've put together an update patch for octave. Seems like some of the
> OpenBSD patches have been merged upstream.
thanks, i've made the same update yesterday with some more tweaks.
I've put together an update patch for octave. Seems like some of the
OpenBSD patches have been merged upstream.
This worked fine for me on i386.
Patch can be found here:
http://www.dickman.org/openbsd/ports_math_octave_2.9.13.patch
update to 2.1.72
other port changes:
- use math/fftw3 library
- fix MASTER_SITES
- add a few patches to include correct headers
- build all HTML documentation and adjust BUILD_DEPENDS accordingly
tested on i386, amd64 and sparc64 without problems.
Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_d
hi,
this update fixes MASTER_SITES and enables use of the fftw3 library.
doesn't break anything on i386.
Index: Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/math/octave/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.9
diff -u -r1.9 Makefile
--- Makefile
This octave update now also fixes regression tests, thanks to some
suggestions by pval@ and [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On my sparc64 all tests pass, on my i386 one test does not pass. This is
related to PR 4578.
tgz attached (it's smaller than the diff).
Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disc
On Sat, Sep 24, 2005 at 12:56:15AM +0200, steven mestdagh wrote:
> > hmm yes, something like 12 out of 1200 tests fail. however, when issuing
> > 'gmake check' in the test directory, only 1 test fails. the exp() function
> > does not return the expected (by the test scripts anyway) result:
> >
> >
Hi,
> Here is another attempt for octave.
it works (builds, installs runs) fine for me on i386 (from 1st
september). Sadly I don't have any other architecture on which I can test.
One other thing I noticed: 'make regress' gives the following output:
# make regress
===> octave-2.1.71 depends on:
On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 11:05:26PM +0200, steven mestdagh wrote:
> > And what about regression tests? IIRC I saw some errors on i386. I'll
> > post detailed info in the evening.
>
> hmm yes, something like 12 out of 1200 tests fail. however, when issuing
> 'gmake check' in the test directory, on
On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 09:06:03AM +0200, Aleksander Piotrowski wrote:
> steven mestdagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Ignore the remark, just make sure your limits are sufficiently high and
> > you have sufficient virtual memory.
> >
> > I tested it on sparc64 as well and it works fine.
>
>
steven mestdagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ignore the remark, just make sure your limits are sufficiently high and
> you have sufficient virtual memory.
>
> I tested it on sparc64 as well and it works fine.
And what about regression tests? IIRC I saw some errors on i386. I'll
post detailed i
On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 10:52:03AM +0200, steven mestdagh wrote:
> hi,
>
> Here is another attempt for octave. It works on amd64 now, but it does not
> want to build a package, since the configure insists on creating a directory
> with x86_64 in the name, instead of amd64. I tried patching config.
hi,
Here is another attempt for octave. It works on amd64 now, but it does not
want to build a package, since the configure insists on creating a directory
with x86_64 in the name, instead of amd64. I tried patching config.sub,
but it somehow gets overwritten again when running configure. If there
53 matches
Mail list logo
