1 |
Hi all, |
2 |
|
3 |
It occurred to me a few months ago, that the sage-on-gentoo overlay |
4 |
was also the place to get a recent `gap`. The version in the main tree |
5 |
is 4.4.12 and in the sage-on-gentoo overlay we have some 4.7.x and |
6 |
4.8.x. However while functional and sufficient to work with sage, |
7 |
gap from the overlay stinks. And then there is the issue of gap packages. |
8 |
|
9 |
Unlike R, gap doesn’t have a nice package installer and you cannot |
10 |
just drop them in a user space (that I know off). |
11 |
Also package’s documentation is messy and expected inside the |
12 |
package. The format seems to be html, new style doc, or tex, old |
13 |
style doc. So often we have both in separate folder. |
14 |
|
15 |
I also discovered there is something called `gac` to precompile |
16 |
packages that hasn’t been exposed by the current ebuild. And a |
17 |
good thing too since it is fairly broken. But looking at it explains a |
18 |
lot about the requirement of keeping gap’s object files around I was |
19 |
told about. |
20 |
|
21 |
So later today I will merge a new gap branch which will include a clean |
22 |
up of files that we don’t want. Expose gac, offer an archive instead of |
23 |
object files for gac to use, and a first batch of gap packages in a new |
24 |
dev-gap category. Anyone wanting to know why I want a new category, |
25 |
there are a lots of packages at |
26 |
http://www.gap-system.org/Packages/packages.html |
27 |
and a new category will eft any possible ambiguity. |
28 |
I am concentrating on packages standardly used in sage but I’ll take |
29 |
request and certainly PR for new packages. |
30 |
|
31 |
If there are any gap users or specialists I’ll take your opinions |
32 |
seriously. |
33 |
|
34 |
Cheers, |
35 |
François |