2008/5/21 Sergio Pascual <sergio.pasra@xxxxxxxxx>: > Iraf has been developed by NOAO until 2006, when the user support was > transferred to a volunteer effort, iraf.net. That was about version > 2.12. In 2007, NOAO recollected the patches and user contributions, > and together with other improvements, released version 2.14. > > Iraf is vast and ancient. It's partly written in C and partly written > in SPP, a custom made language. SPP needs a custom compiler that it's > included in the iraf core. SPP is converted into fortran (using f2c) > and compiled with the C compiler. > > Iraf works in different architectures, but lacks x86_64 support. A > project[1] exists to port iraf to x86_64, and it's basically the work > of one person, Chisato Yamauchi[2]. This work it's outside NOAO or > iraf.net. I help him doing the testing of his developments in my > Fedora system, as he develops in CentOS. > > Iraf includes a copy of the libc of the time of its early developments > (mid-80s), replicating the functionality of basic system calls. It > also includes a modified copy of ncar[3] graphics library 1.0 (current > version is 5.0). ncar wasn't free at that time (I don't know if it's > free know, it seems to be composed of several packages, some free and > some not). > > Iraf graphics facility, x11iraf, contains non-free code also. I tried > to package it in the past[4], but the package couldn't be included due > to legal restrictions again. That's where the thread[5] in iraf.net > comes from. It was me complaining about the license text in the > iraf.net faq no representing the real status of iraf and x11iraf, > misleading into believing that both were free software when they > weren't. You can see also the answer to the complains about closed > code in iraf, basically "please fix it yourself and send me the > patches". As iraf is very far from trivial to compile, I suppose that > the number of patches received across the years is nearly zero. > > Neither iraf.net or noao provide tools to work in iraf development, > such as a version control system. So, if we want to develop something > based in iraf, we at least need to establish a source tree somewhere. > Don't call it a fork if you want, but it's the only way to work. > > > [1] http://sourceforge.net/projects/iraf64 > [2] http://www.ir.isas.jaxa.jp/~cyamauch/ > [3] http://ngwww.ucar.edu/index.html > [4] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249614 > [5] http://iraf.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=86793 > Thanks for all those precisions Sergio. If I understood well, our better (and only ?) option if we want IRAF in Fedora is to push it to our trac server and work hard, right ? ( i do not consider the waiting solution ) -- Michael Ughetto (Telimektar) http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MichaelUghetto <telimektar1er@xxxxxxxxx> || <telimektar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 0x8ECBA2A4 on pgp.mit.edu _______________________________________________ Fedora astronomy mailing list Fedora-astronomy-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Astronomy https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-astronomy-list
