Comment # 9
from pcpa
(In reply to comment #8) > > 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. pari-gp should require the matching pari version. The code to handle it is actually in pari library, but the most common way to access it is from the gp command line. > > 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? Well, in sagemath it is maintained by the data author, but contents should be static, only how it is presented changes. In the case of pari-elldata, it is in a format that pari understands.
You are receiving this mail because:
- You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review