Is it possible to use incr-tcl when working with tcl version 8.4.19?
Which include packages are required?
Until now we used Active-Tcl version 8.6, which came with incr-tcl built-in. Now we need to support stations that only have version 8.4.19 installed, and I want to know whether there's a technological roadblock or if it's just a matter of installing and referencing additional packages.
It's most certainly possible to have [incr Tcl] working with the Tcl 8.4 series.
bash$ tclsh8.4
% puts [info patchlevel]
8.4.7
% package require Itcl
3.3
% puts $itcl::patchLevel
3.3b1
You might prefer a slightly different version, but that combination works on my system (OSX Leopard).
Related
I'm on a Mac X1, Monterey.
I've installed prophet and run into this issue when trying to fit a model.
RuntimeError: Error during optimization: console log output:
dyld[90668]: Library not loaded: #rpath/libtbb.dylib
Referenced from: /Users/{username}/opt/anaconda3/lib/python3.9/site-packages/prophet/stan_model/prophet_model.bin
Reason: tried: '/private/var/folders/cd/dfrqgp4s4ll55cwb7rtgccbw0000gq/T/pip-install-rjpuj450/prophet_d7e4cce10e414c89a572fe3605ae9269/build/lib.macosx-11.1-arm64-cpython-39/prophet/stan_model/cmdstan-2.26.1/stan/lib/stan_math/lib/tbb/libtbb.dylib' (no such file), '/private/var/folders/cd/dfrqgp4s4ll55cwb7rtgccbw0000gq/T/pip-install-rjpuj450/prophet_d7e4cce10e414c89a572fe3605ae9269/build/lib.macosx-11.1-arm64-cpython-39/prophet/stan_model/cmdstan-2.26.1/stan/lib/stan_math/lib/tbb/libtbb.dylib' (no such file), '/usr/local/lib/libtbb.dylib' (no such file), '/usr/lib/libtbb.dylib' (no such file)
I know this has to do with the wrong paths being searched. I can find the dylib in
/Users/{user}/opt/anaconda3/lib/python3.9/site-packages/prophet/stan_model/cmdstan-2.26.1/stan/lib/stan_math/lib/tbb/
But, it seems prophet doesn't know to look there. I'm curious how I can update/fix either the rpath variable or find another solution?
I tried to create a symbolic link with sudo ln -s, but don't have permissions on the laptop.
TIA!
I got it to work on Apple Silicon (M1 Max in my case) by installing older versions of both pystan and prophet:
pip install pystan==2.19.1.1
pip install prophet==1.0
The other important piece of the puzzle is that you should use Python 3.8 to get it working.
Installing older versions of the libraries and using Python 3.8 are both talked about in issue #2002 on Github, but there's not really an explanation of the libtbb.dylib error message.
While building the code getting package sun.security.action is not visible
Package sun.security.action is declared on module java.base, which does not export it to the unnamed module.
What should I do.
Kindly advice, Thanks in advance
Java 8 had no module system - everything is visible or just needs to get imported by archives in jdk (f.e. tools.jar).
Java 9 brought JMS and encapsulated some jdk classes.
In your case, see <JAVA_HOME>/lib/src.zip!/java.base/module-info.class:
exports sun.security.action to
java.desktop,
java.security.jgss,
jdk.crypto.ec,
jdk.incubator.foreign;
Your package isn't public but restricted to some other internal packages/modules.
There was a workaround by adding compiler option --add-exports=java.base/sun.security.action=ALL-UNNAMED at compile time to fix this limitation until version 16.
With version 17 and JEP 403 forget all hope:
It is not a goal to define new standard APIs to replace internal elements for which standard replacements do not yet exist, though such APIs could be suggested in response to this JEP.
Backwards compatibility and important frameworks have lower priority than jdk security - JCP makes strange decisions and works against the community sometimes -.-
My repo in github show the following alert :
Dependabot cannot update ssri to a non-vulnerable version. The latest possible version that can be installed is 6.0.1 because of the following conflicting dependencies:
terser-webpack-plugin#2.3.8 requires ssri#^7.0.0 via cacache#13.0.1
webpack#4.46.0 requires ssri#^6.0.1 via a transitive dependency on
cacache#12.0.4
The earliest fixed version is 8.0.1.
As far as I known, I should update the root package (which is terser-webpack-plugin) in package.json to a newer version, but how to determine the minimum version that can support the non-vulnerable version of the dependency (in this case ssri 8.0.1) since I don't want to update to a too high version and risk breaking things. I am thinking of manually checking through all the release version of terser-webpack-plugin, but it's very tedious and seem wrong to check like that. Any suggestions ?
To speed up the process and save installing each version and its associated dependency tree, we can use npm-remote-ls (https://stackoverflow.com/a/26005786/2815338)
Firstly get the list of available versions:
> npm view terser-webpack-plugin versions
[
'1.0.0', '1.0.1', '1.0.2', '1.1.0', '1.2.0',
...
Then run npm-remote-ls for each version after your current one and filter on the relevant dependency, e.g.
> npm-remote-ls terser-webpack-plugin#3.0.0 | grep ' ssri#'
??? ?????? ssri#8.0.1
??? ??? ??? ?????? ssri#6.0.2
In this case terser-webpack-plugin#5.0.0 is the first with only fixed versions of ssri (8.0.1), and 5.1.0 appears to not include ssri at all, presumably due to webpack no longer depending on cacache.
N.B. the question marks appear to be due to encoding of characters that npm-remote-ls uses to display a tree structure. You could also use Select-String in PowerShell, but this appears to show different (incorrect) characters instead.
I get this error trying to use a github repository as a dependency using elm-install
Problem in dependency repo_name/package_name 1.0.0
The elm-package.json constraints of 'repo_name/package_name' are probably
letting too much stuff through.
What does this exactly mean?
(This answer courtesy of #ilias at Elm Slack channel)
It means that Elm couldn't compile the sources for that package in the context of your package.
Imagine for a minute I'm making a package my-fancy-package, and I have a dependency on a package foo/bar. So in my-fancy-package/elm-package.json, I could have a dependency like "foo/bar": "1.0.0 <= v < 2.0.0". Now, perhaps the most recent version of foo/bar while I'm developing my-fancy-package is 1.5.0. And in version 1.5.0, a new function was added that does exactly what I need in my-fancy-package, so I start using that function. The core issue is that there currently is no automated way to test that a package actually works with all the allowed versions of its dependencies. So now my-fancy-package says it depends on foo/bar at any version between 1.0.0 and 2.0.0, while in reality, it really needs to be at least 1.5.0 because I'm using a function from that package.
Now, imagine you're developing an application, and you're using foo/bar at version 1.2.3. According to the semver ranges of my-fancy-package, that means you should be able to use it, but if you were to actually try it, you'd receive this error: my-fancy-package is stating it is compatible with foo/bar#1.2.3 while it really needs 1.5.0.
The reason the error message doesn't simply say "it failed to compile" is because all the published packages are compiled before publishing. The most common reason for a package failing to compile in some context is that its dependencies aren't "accurate": they're letting too much stuff through.
In case of elm-install and packages from github, it's harder to say - it could actually be broken package.
Another common cause for this error is a rather silly one - conflicting definitions of infix operators. The associativity and precedence of infix ops can only be defined "globally", so if there are 2 packages that define the same infix operator, that could become a problem
We had been using version 0.11.0 of angular-bootstrap from npmjs. It appears that version is no longer available on npmjs. From the commands below does this mean that someone actually unpublished the older packages?
prompt:~$ npm view angular-bootstrap time
{ modified: '2015-01-12T06:48:54.881Z',
created: '2014-01-29T21:54:32.213Z',
'0.0.1': '2014-01-29T21:54:37.589Z',
'0.0.2': '2014-01-29T22:03:08.814Z',
'0.0.3': '2014-01-29T22:51:49.998Z',
'0.0.4': '2014-02-11T15:14:17.078Z',
'0.11.0': '2014-06-24T07:06:56.435Z',
'0.13.0-SNAPSHOT': '2014-12-02T13:05:43.151Z',
'0.12.0': '2015-01-12T06:46:41.986Z' }
prompt:~$ npm view angular-bootstrap versions
0.12.0
I agree, the package seems to have been unpublished. You can still access it from the github history, as follows:
$ npm install "angular-ui/bootstrap#0.11.0"
(note that you may not need quoting, but some shells will interpret the # as a comment-begin character.) You can also use this syntax in dependencies inside package.json
If you have a project in production that depends on this, you should probably make a fork of the angular-ui/bootstrap repository and point towards that.
(I had some difficulty making this work on Windows, but it looks like you're on a Unixy system, so you should be fine.)
Ticket discussing this and the future is at https://github.com/angular-ui/bootstrap/issues/1636