11/05/2010 18:38 +0200, Matthias Schroeder wrote: > Hi Troy, > > Troy Dawson wrote: > > Troy J Dawson wrote: > >> Vladimir Titov wrote: > >>>>>>>> On Wed, 5 May 2010, Oleg Sadov wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Date: Mon, 03 May 2010 10:18:06 -0500 > >>>>>>>>> From: Troy Dawson <[log in to unmask]> > >>>>>>>>> To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]> > >>>>>>>>> Subject: gnuplot42 in SL 5.5 > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Hi All, > >>>>>>>>> I haven't seen any conflicts yet. How do people feel about putting > >>>>>>>>> gnuplot42 in SL 5.5? > >>>>>>>>> I give it a thumbs up, but I wanted to know how others feel before > >>>>>>>>> putting it in. > >>>>>>>>> > >>> There are some small differences between 4.0 and 4.2 version, > >>> but I don't see why we should use old version. > >>> > >>> However, now the newest version exists, gnuplot-4.4 (see > >>> ftp://ftp.linux-ink.ru/pub/SLCE/5rolling/testing/{SRPMS,i386}/gnuplot/*.rpm). > >>> Some bugs are fixed, some terminals are added, > >>> some new features are released. Why we have to wait a while > >>> before using this version? > > Waiting a while gives the very fresh 4.4.0 some time to mature, and to > have a few bugs fixed. 4.4.0 has been released in March, so waiting a > little seems to be a good idea. > > >>> A few useful applications > >>> use gnuplot as graphical tool, for example octave, maxima etc. > >>> Gnuplot tends to fit these applications (wxwidget etc.) > >>> and we must use newest gnuplot version. > > In that case it should be checked that the provided gnuplot is working > with the versions of these apps that are in SL, right? Of course -- this is a right way. By the way -- colleagues, what do you think about necessity such kind of software for SL users? We prepared a lot of scientific software for SL-compatible distributions in our repositories: ftp://ftp.linux-ink.ru/pub/SLCE/5x/yum/slce.repo ftp://ftp.linux-ink.ru/pub/SLCE/5x/yum/naulinux.repo Would it be helpful for scientific society? Which another software packages may be interested? > >>> Vladimir Titov, Linux-ink > >> Hi Vladimir, > >> If a package is supported by RedHat, we are not going to change it just > >> because it is old. If we were to do that then we might as well update > >> the entire release each time. That is not what Scientific Linux is about. > >> Scientific Linux is an Enterprise linux, which means that packages > >> remain stable. Sometimes those packages get old, but they remain stable. > >> The package gnuplot42 is not updating the gnuplot that RedHat already > >> supports, but add's another package. It is packaged so that a person > >> can have either the old gnuplot, or the newer 4.2 gnuplot installed at > >> the same time. > >> But, you do have a point. > >> If we are making this new gnuplot42, why make it 42 instead of 44. The > >> easy answer is that when this was started, 44 wasn't released. > >> > >> What do people think? > >> Should we change gnuplot42 to gnuplot44? > >> That shouldn't be too hard. > >> Is there any technical reasons why we wouldn't want gnuplot44? > >> > >> Troy > >> p.s. SL 5.5 Release Candidate 1 will have gnuplot42, but if we work fast > >> on this we could have gnuplot44 in the final release. > > Replacing the version after the rc phase doesn't sound good... Exactly. > > Things got very quiet about this. > > I've been having a hard time getting gnuplot44 to build, it seems to > > want a newer autoconf or something, but right now I really don't have > > the time to mess with it. Strange... Ok, Troy, we will check package rebuilding process again. > > Since this is a last minute change, I would feel better with staying > > with gnuplot42 for the release of SL 5.5. > > Agreed. +1 > > That's what's been in testing > > and everyone who tested it said it worked for them. > > If someone wants to take the source rpm from gnuplot42 and figure out > > why it's not compiling, why don't we see about getting that into SL 5.6. > > That sounds much better. Sure. > Matthias > > > > > Thanks > > Troy --Oleg