[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #60053] package: dependency may also be octave itself.

[Ernst Reissner]

Follow-up Comment #8, bug #60053 (project octave):

I face a small bug: OCTAVE_VERSION is a variable 
and could be modified by the user. 
Better to use version() instead. 

By the way, documentation is wrong: version() is not an alias 
for OCTAVE_VERSION, maybe the other way round: 
OCTAVE_VERSION, provided for compatibility 
may be initialized with version(). 


@philip: As implemented for 'octave' 
one could also do for java: 

    ## Is the current dependency java?
    if (strcmp (dep.package, "java"))
      if (! compare_versions (version('-java'), dep.version, dep.operator))
        bad_deps{end+1} = dep;
      endif

But we need additional: 
It could be java without explicit version 
and java may not be provided at all. 

I tested: 
octave:1> version
ans = 6.1.0
octave:2> version('-java')
ans = no usable Java Runtime Environment (x86_64) found:
/usr/lib/jvm/java-11-openjdk/lib/server/libjvm.so: failed to load: Error
loading shared library /usr/lib/jvm/java-11-openjdk/lib/server/libjvm.so: No
such file or directory

Well, 'no usable Java Runtime Environment' seems to signify 
no installation. 
What makes me feel worried: is java 6.1.0 tied to java 11? 

The same way could be done for fftw, blas and lapack. 

Note that documentation tell about not being reliable. 
Shall be fixed, right? 

    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?60053>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via Savannah
  https://savannah.gnu.org/