[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

RFP: octave and octave-forge for EL5



Apparently Octave has been orphaned for EL5 , although it is still in
Fedora Extras.  Seems like octave and octave-forge are excellent
candidates for EPEL.  They do successfully build from FC6/7 src.rpm
packages under the CentOS5 beta that is currently undergoing QA testing,
albeit with a few additional requirements...

octave SRPMS:
fftw-3.1.2-3.fc6.src.rpm
glpk-4.13-1.fc6.src.rpm
hdf5-1.6.5-7.fc7.src.rpm
octave-2.9.9-1.fc6.src.rpm
rpmdevtools-5.3-1.fc6.src.rpm
ufsparse-2.1.1-1.fc6.src.rpm

octave RPMS:
fftw-3.1.2-3.el5.i386.rpm
fftw-debuginfo-3.1.2-3.el5.i386.rpm
fftw-devel-3.1.2-3.el5.i386.rpm
glpk-debuginfo-4.13-1.el5.i386.rpm
glpk-devel-4.13-1.el5.i386.rpm
glpk-utils-4.13-1.el5.i386.rpm
hdf5-1.6.5-7.el5.i386.rpm
hdf5-debuginfo-1.6.5-7.el5.i386.rpm
hdf5-devel-1.6.5-7.el5.i386.rpm
octave-2.9.9-1.el5.i386.rpm
octave-debuginfo-2.9.9-1.el5.i386.rpm
octave-devel-2.9.9-1.el5.i386.rpm
rpmdevtools-5.3-1.el5.noarch.rpm
ufsparse-2.1.1-1.el5.i386.rpm
ufsparse-debuginfo-2.1.1-1.el5.i386.rpm
ufsparse-devel-2.1.1-1.el5.i386.rpm

For octave-forge:

octave-forge SRPMS:
cln-1.1.13-2.fc6.src.rpm
ginac-1.3.6-1.fc7.src.rpm
gsl-1.8-2.fc7.src.rpm
libdap-3.7.2-3.fc7.src.rpm
libnc-dap-3.6.2-5.fc7.src.rpm
octave-forge-2006.07.09-7.fc6.src.rpm
qhull-2003.1-6.fc6.src.rpm

octave-forge RPMS:
cln-1.1.13-2.el5.i386.rpm
cln-debuginfo-1.1.13-2.el5.i386.rpm
cln-devel-1.1.13-2.el5.i386.rpm
ginac-1.3.6-1.el5.i386.rpm
ginac-debuginfo-1.3.6-1.el5.i386.rpm
ginac-devel-1.3.6-1.el5.i386.rpm
ginac-utils-1.3.6-1.el5.i386.rpm
libdap-3.7.2-3.el5.i386.rpm
libdap-debuginfo-3.7.2-3.el5.i386.rpm
libdap-devel-3.7.2-3.el5.i386.rpm
libnc-dap-3.6.2-5.el5.i386.rpm
libnc-dap-debuginfo-3.6.2-5.el5.i386.rpm
libnc-dap-devel-3.6.2-5.el5.i386.rpm
octave-forge-2006.07.09-7.el5.i386.rpm
octave-forge-debuginfo-2006.07.09-7.el5.i386.rpm
qhull-2003.1-6.el5.i386.rpm
qhull-debuginfo-2003.1-6.el5.i386.rpm
qhull-devel-2003.1-6.el5.i386.rpm

This is not necessarily the exact set of packages that might be selected
to address the goals of enterprise-level stability that have been
discussed in recent posts, just what worked for me in a test-of-concept
build. (e.g. not my "best effort" :-)

Phil

P.S. Could someone please fix the spelling in the Reply-to string?
EPEL development disccusion <epel-devel-list redhat com>



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]