GNU Octave:

[Jonathan Underwood]

I'm not sure what that means for Octave, which is an interpreted language.
AFAIK, it would be unusual to be linking directly to Octave. So, I'm not
sure an ABI break is meaningful in this context. But, I'm not a big octave
user, so maybe I missed something.


On 12 April 2013 05:33, Orion Poplawski <orion at cora.nwra.com> wrote:

> On 04/11/2013 05:24 PM, Rex Dieter wrote:
>
>> Susi Lehtola wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Quoting Suresh Raja
>>> <sureshraja.cu at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> Could someone update the GNU Octave in the EPEL repository to the
>>>> current version 3.6.4?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Can't. The EPEL6 branch is at 3.4.3, and a version upgrade is not
>>> really allowed in the EPEL guidelines.
>>>
>>
>> Why not?
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/**EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#A_**
>> major_version_update<http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#A_major_version_update>
>>
>> Only mentions ABI changes or incompabilities.  Is this newer version known
>> to be incompatible in some way?
>>
>>
> Yes, it is ABI in-compatible.
>
>
> --
> Orion Poplawski
> Technical Manager                     303-415-9701 x222
> NWRA/CoRA Division                    FAX: 303-415-9702
> 3380 Mitchell Lane                  orion at cora.nwra.com
> Boulder, CO 80301              http://www.cora.nwra.com
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> epel-devel-list mailing list
> epel-devel-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/**mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-**list<https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/epel-devel-list/attachments/20130412/2465976f/attachment.htm>