Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Dummy package _sagemath: record downstream package of Sage in distributions #33870

Closed
mkoeppe opened this issue May 19, 2022 · 44 comments
Closed

Comments

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

mkoeppe commented May 19, 2022

To generate info for src/doc/en/installation/linux.rst
and to provision devcontainers that launch downstream Sage as packaged by distributions (as done in #33671 for archlinux, conda)

Depends on #34252

CC: @antonio-rojas @kiwifb @isuruf @collares @tornaria @tobihan @jhpalmieri @seblabbe @nbruin @kwankyu

Component: documentation

Author: Matthias Koeppe

Branch/Commit: 4280369

Reviewer: Kwankyu Lee

Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/33870

@mkoeppe mkoeppe added this to the sage-9.7 milestone May 19, 2022
@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented May 19, 2022

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented May 19, 2022

Commit: fc06250

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented May 19, 2022

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. New commits:

fc06250build/pkgs/_sagemath: New

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented May 19, 2022

Changed commit from fc06250 to a2557d4

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented May 19, 2022

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

a2557d4build/pkgs/_sagemath/distros/debian.txt: Move debian info here from src/doc/en/installation/linux.rst

@mkoeppe

This comment has been minimized.

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented May 19, 2022

comment:4

I have taken the information about the packages from repology; please help to make this information accurate

Also https://trac.sagemath.org/wiki/Distribution#Packagemanagers probably needs updating - I've come across some broken links etc.

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented May 19, 2022

Changed commit from a2557d4 to 3dd0d18

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented May 19, 2022

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

3dd0d18build/pkgs/_sagemath/type: New

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented May 19, 2022

Author: Matthias Koeppe, ...

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented Jul 4, 2022

Changed author from Matthias Koeppe, ... to Matthias Koeppe

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Aug 2, 2022

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. Last 10 new commits:

9d1e07aRevive furo
f19b597Add link to the logo
09d5f5cFix the logo link for reference
ae75d53Fix a subtle reference problem for build_options
3519bedRun docbuild workflow with single thread
1274718Fix a suspicious part of categories doc
e5b1f7eAdd search.html
ebd3b77Better pygments style
73e5aa3Make white logo transparent to match with furo
05d909cMerge #34252

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Aug 2, 2022

Changed commit from 3dd0d18 to 05d909c

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented Aug 2, 2022

Dependencies: #34252

@kwankyu
Copy link
Collaborator

kwankyu commented Aug 2, 2022

comment:11
diff --git a/build/pkgs/_sagemath/SPKG.rst b/build/pkgs/_sagemath/SPKG.rst
index c0021422ad..5f38af716d 100644
--- a/build/pkgs/_sagemath/SPKG.rst
+++ b/build/pkgs/_sagemath/SPKG.rst
@@ -12,4 +12,4 @@ including documentation and Jupyter.
 Downstream Contact
 ------------------
 
-See https://trac.sagemath.org/wiki/Distribution#Packagemanagers
+See :trac:`wiki/Distribution#Packagemanagers`.

@kwankyu
Copy link
Collaborator

kwankyu commented Aug 2, 2022

comment:12

Before the above change, there was an error in building the documentation. But with the above change, it shows as

See trac ticket #wiki/Distribution#Packagemanagers.

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented Aug 2, 2022

comment:13

Somewhere else we use

:trac:`Trac wiki page Distribution <wiki/Distribution>`

I'll change it to that.

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Aug 2, 2022

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

7cc2e57build/pkgs/_sagemath/SPKG.rst: Fix markup of trac wiki link

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Aug 2, 2022

Changed commit from 05d909c to 7cc2e57

@kwankyu
Copy link
Collaborator

kwankyu commented Aug 2, 2022

comment:15

These "dummy script packages" might be of type "dummy" so that they are not mixed with real standard and optional packages.

@kwankyu
Copy link
Collaborator

kwankyu commented Aug 2, 2022

comment:16

Please leave "dependencies" blank instead of "none". It will look better.

@kwankyu
Copy link
Collaborator

kwankyu commented Aug 2, 2022

comment:17

Could a dummy package be really installable? Specifically, how about "_recommended" package?

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented Aug 2, 2022

comment:18

The word "None" is generated by build/bin/sage-spkg-info. Do you suggest I should change that and leave the "Dependencies" section blank in general in this case?

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented Aug 2, 2022

comment:19

No, dummy packages are not installable. That's what makes them dummy. _recommended is not installable either

@kwankyu
Copy link
Collaborator

kwankyu commented Aug 2, 2022

comment:20

Then the type of a dummy package is not significant?

@kwankyu
Copy link
Collaborator

kwankyu commented Aug 2, 2022

comment:21

Replying to @mkoeppe:

The word "None" is generated by build/bin/sage-spkg-info. Do you suggest I should change that and leave the "Dependencies" section blank in general in this case?

For documentation look and feel, yes. But if you think "None" is better for other considerations, then I would not insist.

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented Aug 2, 2022

comment:22

The output is only about look and feel. I'll change it.

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Aug 2, 2022

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

3392763build/bin/sage-spkg-info: Do not print 'None' when there are no dependencies

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Aug 2, 2022

Changed commit from 7cc2e57 to 3392763

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented Aug 2, 2022

comment:24

Replying to @kwankyu:

Then the type of a dummy package is not significant?

I think they are all "optional", there's no additional distinction

@kwankyu
Copy link
Collaborator

kwankyu commented Aug 2, 2022

comment:25

Replying to @kwankyu:

These "dummy script packages" might be of type "dummy" so that they are not mixed with real standard and optional packages.

Just an idea for another ticket...

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented Aug 2, 2022

comment:26

I'd say "dummy script" is a "source type", not a "package type", see https://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/developer/packaging.html#package-source-types

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented Aug 2, 2022

comment:27

Replying to @mkoeppe:

Replying to @kwankyu:

Then the type of a dummy package is not significant?

I think they are all "optional", there's no additional distinction

Except for _prereq, which is a standard dummy script package.

@kwankyu
Copy link
Collaborator

kwankyu commented Aug 2, 2022

comment:28

Replying to @mkoeppe:

I'd say "dummy script" is a "source type", not a "package type", see https://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/developer/packaging.html#package-source-types

But "dummy package" is a package type.

More seriously it seems that the last two lines are also auto-generated, and not suitable for a dummy package.

...
nix:

$ nix-env --install sage
void:

$ sudo xbps-install  sagemath
See https://repology.org/project/sagemath/versions

However, these system packages will not be used for building Sage 
because spkg-configure.m4 has not been written for this package; see trac ticket #27330

So these dummy packages really should be treated separately. But for this, later.

There is a typo:

See <../reference/spkg/index.html>`_ for the names of packages ...

Missing apostrophe?

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Aug 2, 2022

Changed commit from 3392763 to ef7732f

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Aug 2, 2022

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

ef7732fsrc/doc/en/installation/linux.rst: Fix markup

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Aug 2, 2022

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

6bf421esrc/doc/en/developer/packaging.rst: Explain dummy packages

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Aug 2, 2022

Changed commit from ef7732f to 6bf421e

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Aug 2, 2022

Changed commit from 6bf421e to 4280369

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Aug 2, 2022

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

4280369Change 'dummy script package' to just 'dummy package'

@kwankyu
Copy link
Collaborator

kwankyu commented Aug 2, 2022

comment:32

Thanks for updating stuffs for dummy packages.

It looks good to me.

@kwankyu
Copy link
Collaborator

kwankyu commented Aug 2, 2022

Reviewer: Kwankyu Lee

@kwankyu kwankyu changed the title Dummy script package _sagemath, record downstream package of Sage in distributions Dummy package _sagemath: record downstream package of Sage in distributions Aug 2, 2022
@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented Aug 2, 2022

comment:34

Thank you!

@vbraun
Copy link
Member

vbraun commented Aug 6, 2022

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants