maxima submitted to Fedora Extras



Hi Rex,

>>>>> "Rex" == Rex Dieter <rdieter@math.unl.edu> wrote:

Rex> Alberto LUSIANI wrote:

>>>>>>> "Rex" == Rex Dieter <rdieter@math.unl.edu> wrote:

Rex> FYI, I've submitted maxima for inclusion into Fedora Extras:
Rex> maxima-5.9.0: http://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=754
Rex> maxima-5.9.0.9beta2
Rex> http://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1948 Feedback is
Rex> welcome.

>> I have recently made some refinements to a .src.rpm file originally
>> written by James Amundson <amundson@fnal.gov> for
>> maxima-5.9.0.9beta2 (exactly your version) for RedHat 9.  Perhaps
>> you could incorporate also my improvements in a subsequent release.
>> I have looked at your .src.rpm file and these refinements appears
>> to be missing.  Here is a description:

Rex> I see a *LOT* of upstream bugs here.  Are these addressed/fixed
Rex> in the latest beta?

I am using the last beta I believe, anyway the same you use.

[...]
>> - in your package, there is no texhash call for the installed tex
>> file (which is left in /usr/share/maxima). My -emacs rpm includes:

Rex> What's the purpose of this tex file?  And how is texhash supposed
Rex> to find it if it's not in /usr/share/texmf?

The tex file is used in conjunction with emaxima.el to format maxima
sessions in latex).  One can even use emaxima.el+emaxima.sty with
preview-latex. 

Yes I agre that if the .sty file is not properly installed,  then
there is no point in calling texhash.

In my .spec file I install the tex file on the proper
place: %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/texmf/tex/latex/emaxima/emaxima.sty.

>> Your rpm does not produce the maxima book, whose sources are
>> included in the maxima tar file. Some work has to be done in order
>> to produce a PDF file from the provided sources: - the breqn latex
>> package has to be included - two .tex files in the distribution
>> must be replaced This is how I build maxima.pdf and intromax.pdf:

Rex> I assume these aren't built as part of the normal make; make
Rex> install process. ??

Right.

Rex> If not, why not?

I don't know, probably it is work on progress.  Agreed it is not a
fault of your .spec file, however, if you would like to produce the
two PDFs that can be produced with minimal adjustements, my .spec file
gives an example how.

Greetings,
-- 
Alberto