On 1 Mai, 17:26, ross kyprianou <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: > > You can try (or might want) to build on a newer (and faster) x86 > > machine with SAGE_FAT_BINARY=YES (see README.txt). > > Oh to have the option! > (I just have this PC for the moment ;-)
;-) (You may ask someone else to build a binary for your machine. Otherwise you could report how long the build took on your system, though this depends on the amount of RAM and disk speed as well. Last time I've built 4.3.5 on a Pentium 4 *Prescott*/Socket 478/3,2 GHz, with 4GB DDR1-400 CL2, it took 4 hours.) > Ive been using sage successfully either by building from source or > using the binaries as they were released, for approximately a year on > this same PC. I recall things were ok both under Ubuntu 9.04 and 9.10. > This is the 1st serious problem Ive had and its coincided with Ubuntu > 10.04 but that may be a coincidence. Am I right you upgraded to *both* Sage 4.4 and Ubuntu 10.04 at the same time? (It wasn't clear to me if the Sage *4.4* binary previously worked under 9.04/9.10 on the same machine.) > Ill post one more time after a build from source > > Until then... Ok... -Leif -- 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 URL: http://www.sagemath.org
