[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Google
  Web www.spinics.net

[Bug 822896] Review Request: pari-elldata - PARI/GP Computer Algebra System elliptic curves



Comment # 8 from
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > (In reply to comment #4)
> > > - Shipping the *.asc sig seems pretty meaningless to me.
> > 
> > I just see it being used as an extra check that the tarball hasn't changed,
> > (if we keep the signature in git) given that upstream's releases aren't
> > versioned.
> I guess you are aware, Fedora's git is automatically adding m5sums to
> "sources"?

True, but I guess the signature is a bit more obvious.

> This would apply if you intend to push the tarball to git's lookaside cache.
> 
> However, this would raise the next point, I don't know the answer to: Does
> Fedora's git lookaside cache allow unversioned tarballs, rsp. can the
> lookaside cache handle this?

Yes: the URL to a tarball in the lookaside cache is:

http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/repo/pkgs/<PACKAGE>/<TARBALL>/<MD5SUM>/<TARBALL>

So tarballs with the same name for the same package can co-exist as long as
their md5sums are different, which is a pretty safe bet.

(In reply to comment #7)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> 
> > > Only issue I see now is that it should have a "Requires: pari-gp"
> > > for proper resolution of dependencies.
> > 
> > Can't do that as it would lead to a circular build dependency for pari
> > itself, and it's also conceivable that other software could use the same
> > data without requiring pari-gp. I did add a "Conflicts: pari-gp < 2.2.11" as
> > that's the oldest version that can use this data, though perhaps that should
> > be "pari" rather than "pari-gp"?
> 
>   Do you mean these packages will be build requires of pari now? I
> see they could be useful in a very complete %check.

Yes, that's the intention - see
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821191#c10

>   I think the conflict does not matter much, as pari-gp is a pari
> subpackage.

Don't know what you mean by that. I was wondering whether it was pari-gp that
used the data packages, or the underlying library "pari" - the conflict should
refer to the part of pari that actually uses the data.

>   About data reuse, actually, sagemath ships elldata in a different
> format (not sure if complete and optimized for size, but a lot smaller),
> as well as it also creates a cremona_mini.db sqlite3 db during build.

But that's derived from this package though, isn't it?


You are receiving this mail because:
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]

Add to Google