Bug 242160

Summary:	GSL 1.8 documentation incomplete
Product:	[openSUSE] openSUSE 10.2	Reporter:	Armin Schoech <armin.schoech>
Component:	Development	Assignee:	Andreas Jaeger <aj>
Status:	RESOLVED FIXED	QA Contact:	E-mail List <qa-bugs>
Severity:	Normal
Priority:	P5 - None	CC:	aj, armin.schoech, pth
Version:	Final	Keywords:	All_Languages, documentation
Target Milestone:	---
Hardware:	i386
OS:	SUSE Other
Whiteboard:
Found By:	Customer	Services Priority:
Business Priority:		Blocker:	---
Marketing QA Status:	---	IT Deployment:	---
Bug Depends on:	154129
Bug Blocks:

Description Armin Schoech 2007-02-05 14:45:50 UTC

+++ This bug was initially created as a copy of Bug #154129 +++

The formulas describing the different function are missing from the package gsl-devel under SuSE 10.2:

As an example, compare the two pages:

SuSE 10.2, gsl-devel-1.8-23 :
/usr/share/doc/packages/gsl-devel/gsl-ref_20.html#SEC340

GSL 1.8 homepage:
http://www.gnu.org/software/gsl/manual/gsl-ref.html#Mean-and-standard-deviat
ion-and-variance

For the function "gsl_stats_mean()", the definition of the mean is 
missing in the file "gsl-ref_20.html" from SuSE 10.2 :

"This function returns the arithmetic mean of data, a dataset of 
length n with stride stride. The arithmetic mean, or sample mean, is 
denoted by \Hat\mu and defined as, << MISSING FORMULA >>
where x_i are the elements of the dataset data. For samples drawn 
from a gaussian distribution the variance of \Hat\mu is \sigma^2 / N."

I have not checked all other pages of the GSL documentation. But I 
would guess that these formulas are missing on at least some of the 
other pages as well.

Comment 1 Kurt Garloff 2007-02-07 13:40:40 UTC

I guess we miss -l2h in the texinfo command line and latex2html in the
BuildRequires:
... testing ...

Comment 2 Kurt Garloff 2007-02-08 07:00:42 UTC

... correct. (Obviously, above should read texi2html, not texinfo).
With a slight complication, that in the build path, which contains gsl-1.8
as a path component, latex2html fails (claiming dvips would not be able to
handle path names with a . in it), so a few hacks were needed in the spec file.
It is fixed for future versions, feel free to verify FACTORY.
I can also publish RPMs for 10.x if you like.
I'll have to check whether this problem warrants an official update for
10.x. AJ?

Comment 3 Andreas Jaeger 2007-02-08 07:33:19 UTC

This does not warrant an official update for older products.

Marking as fixed for 10.3.

Comment 4 Kurt Garloff 2007-02-09 16:29:38 UTC

Armin, let me know (private mail) if you want to see updated RPMs for 10.2 at
an unofficial place.
Thanks for the report!