As a couple of people have noticed, my matplotlib-daily PPA has become broken the other day, especially for 64-bit users. The root cause of this is that building the docs now requires numpydoc, which is only packaged in the development release of Ubuntu. I've taken this as a prompt to switch the daily recipe builds to raring. I think most people who had added my PPA were interested in a Python 3 package of matplotlib. So I've backported the 1.2.0 package to precise and quantal, in another PPA: https://launchpad.net/~takluyver/+archive/python3 If you were using python3-matplotlib from my PPA on precise or quantal, I recommend that you switch to my python3 PPA. It's actually a downgrade, but it's a stable version that shouldn't do anything unexpected. If people want to keep running development versions of matplotlib on precise/quantal, speak up: I can reconsider turning off the daily builds for those versions. Thanks, Thomas ------------ Technical detail, for anyone interested: the architecture-independent -data and -doc packages are built on i386. When the docs fail to build, the -data package isn't created. The amd64 build succeeded, but the architecture-dependent packages require a precisely matching version of the -data package. apt complains that python[3]-matplotlib has a missing dependency.
Thanks. Sorry about not communicating the new dependency very well. As this only affects those building the docs (meaning primarily developers and not end-users) it wasn't given the same care. We had had some back-and-forth about whether to include a local copy of numpydoc in matplotlib, but ultimately decided not to as this is generally not what packagers like to see. In there a way to depend on numpydoc from the development release in your PPA (only as a build-time dependency?) Mike On 01/26/2013 11:00 AM, Thomas Kluyver wrote: > As a couple of people have noticed, my matplotlib-daily PPA has become > broken the other day, especially for 64-bit users. The root cause of > this is that building the docs now requires numpydoc, which is only > packaged in the development release of Ubuntu. > > I've taken this as a prompt to switch the daily recipe builds to > raring. I think most people who had added my PPA were interested in a > Python 3 package of matplotlib. So I've backported the 1.2.0 package > to precise and quantal, in another PPA: > > https://launchpad.net/~takluyver/+archive/python3 > <https://launchpad.net/%7Etakluyver/+archive/python3> > > If you were using python3-matplotlib from my PPA on precise or > quantal, I recommend that you switch to my python3 PPA. It's actually > a downgrade, but it's a stable version that shouldn't do anything > unexpected. > > If people want to keep running development versions of matplotlib on > precise/quantal, speak up: I can reconsider turning off the daily > builds for those versions. > > Thanks, > Thomas > ------------ > > Technical detail, for anyone interested: the architecture-independent > -data and -doc packages are built on i386. When the docs fail to > build, the -data package isn't created. The amd64 build succeeded, but > the architecture-dependent packages require a precisely matching > version of the -data package. apt complains that python[3]-matplotlib > has a missing dependency. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS, > MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current > with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft > MVPs and experts. ON SALE this month only -- learn more at: > http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnnow-d2d > > > _______________________________________________ > Matplotlib-devel mailing list > Mat...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
On 28 January 2013 15:57, Michael Droettboom <md...@st...> wrote: > Thanks. Sorry about not communicating the new dependency very well. As > this only affects those building the docs (meaning primarily developers and > not end-users) it wasn't given the same care. > That's fine. I think I did see the discussion, but I didn't pay it much attention. > We had had some back-and-forth about whether to include a local copy of > numpydoc in matplotlib, but ultimately decided not to as this is generally > not what packagers like to see. In there a way to depend on numpydoc from > the development release in your PPA (only as a build-time dependency?) > If we want builds for pre-raring versions, I think the way to do it would be to backport the numpydoc package, and put it in the PPA - it will use packages in the same PPA to satisfy build dependencies. This is easy enough to do if people want it, I'm just aware that each build runs for the best part of an hour*, on two architectures times however many releases we target. If people are actually interested in running the daily packages, that's worth doing, but if not, I don't want to tie up Launchpad's build farm. My own use was the Python 3 package, which 1.2.0 can now meet. *If that seems like a long build time, it has to set up build dependencies, build and test four times (Python 2 & 3, normal & debug), and build the docs. It's about an hour on i386 (which does the docs), and about half an hour on amd64. Thomas