On Oct 28, 12:51 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 9:10 AM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 28, 8:55 am, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 4:23 AM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> > On Oct 27, 11:42 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> > <SNIP>
>
> >> >> > We had a vote on this a month or two back and then then consensus was
> >> >> > not to include gp2c per default. I agree that the patch should be
> >> >> > merged, though.
>
> >> >> Yes, that's what happened.
>
> >> >> I think the better way for gp2c to get into sage is for it to be
> >> >> standard in pari itself. Then it will automatically be in Sage.
> >> >> Have you proposed that it be included standard in pari yet?
>
> >> >> By the way, Karim Belebas told me numerous times that Sage
> >> >> should use the latest snapshot version of pari instead of the
> >> >> stable version we use now.
>
> >> > I did build a pari-2.4.3.spkg at SD 10 and while gen.pyx passes
> >> > doctests there were problems with the gp doctests. I did take some
> >> > notes about which patches no longer applied and which patches had been
> >> > merged, so if anyone wants to try his/her luck let me know.=
>
> >> Can you post these notes to a trac ticket and post the number
> >> here? That said, Karim made it crystal clear to me that he
> >> very strongly recommends that we use:
> >> http://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/pub/pari/unstable/pari-2.4.2.alpha.tar.gz
>
> > Ok, I wasn't precise above: I did upgrade to the 2.4.3svn release. I
> > still do have that spkg around.
>
> Ok, I wasn't precise above either. I think Karim Belabas (pari lead
> developer) wants us to use the version here:
> http://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/download.html
> that is an official linked tarball that is labeled "development version".
> The svn version (e.g., the 2.4.3svn you used) is something we should
> not use. It is labeled: " * Warning: This latter snapshot contains
> bleeding edge patches, constantly updated. It may not even compile!
> You may want to check the Buildlogs page first."
I was not advocating to go to the 2.4.3svn release, just that I had
been asked at SD10 how one could use 2.4.x-svn in combination with
Sage.
> Karim, please correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks!
If 2.4.2 is the suggested version to use we should go for it.
> William
Cheers,
Michael
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
