On Sep 6, 11:14 pm, David Kirkby <david.kir...@onetel.net> wrote: > 2009/9/6 John H Palmieri <jhpalmier...@gmail.com>: > > John, > I'm not convinced that is building a 64-bit version. This is based on 2 > things.
[snip] > Also when I run > > file ./local/lib/libecl.9.8.4.dylib > > to see if it has created a 64-bit library, it does not appear to me at > has. It says: > > ./local/lib/libecl.9.8.4.dylib: Mach-O dynamically linked shared library i386 > > whereas for other libraries 'file' reports: > > ./local/lib/libzn_poly.dylib: Mach-O 64-bit dynamically > linked shared library x86_64 > > I'd be intersted what you get if you run 'file' on the library. I > believe you will find you are generating a 32-bit library, not the > 64-bit you think you are. You're right. Sage seems to run with it, though. Will it actually do something wrong, or just not be as fast as a 64-bit library? (I'm running the test suite now...) John --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
