On 2009-Mar-23 12:38:45 -0700, mabshoff <mabsh...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> FreeBSD and I've reached the point where I can compile sage-3.4 on >> FreeBSD-8/amd64 (using gcc/g++/gfortran 4.3) and get it to start. > >Which FreeBSD release are you using?
As I said, 8-current/amd64. >This is way too much - I get Sage to build and pass all but a few >(around 15 or so IIRC) tests with 4 small patches. Ah. Are these patches available? I looked in the FreeBSD entry on the wiki but whilst it talks about various failures for older versions of sage, I couldn't find any reference to either sage-3.4 or FreeBSD patches. >Why do you apply fixes from ports? Python compiles out of the box for >me on FreeBSD. The python embedded in sage compiles for me without patches but a lot of the failures I am getting point towards a python problem. The FreeBSD port for python 2.5.4 includes a number of patches that may be relevant to the problems I am having. As a general question on sage packaging, the sources are currently totally self-contained. Whilst this has the advantage that all the dependencies are in one place, it also has the disadvantage that it results in multiple copies of some tools (bzip2, gd, libgcrypt, libgpg_error, libpng, mpfr, python, sqlite3 and zlib in my case) being installed. Was this done because Linux doesn't have a standard package management system across all distros or to allow sage to include sage-specific patches in the tools it uses (I notice this is done for some tools)? I know that trying to turn sage into a FreeBSD port in its current form will encounter resistance due to this (there is pressure on other large ports like OpenOffice.org and the Mozilla suite to depend on FreeBSD ports rather than embedding equivalent functionality). -- Peter Jeremy
pgphA9VoS669m.pgp
Description: PGP signature
