On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Dr. David Kirkby <david.kir...@onetel.net> wrote: > On 06/ 9/10 12:40 PM, Dima Pasechnik wrote: >> >> Well, I saw upgrades fail repeatedly, and William was writing here >> that -upgrade is basically not ready >> for prime time use. >> >> Indeed, one needs to have at least an spkg dependencies mechanism in >> place, before -upgrade >> can be done in a fool-proof way. At the moment it is adhoc - an spkg >> can be checking that another spkg is there and has version at least >> something, but this is not supported in any consistent way, e.g. like >> it is done with Debian packages. >> I.e. there is no declarative facilities in place that would allow one >> to specify such an interdependency, >> they rather need to be hard-coded into the spkg install script. >> >> So one needs to develop/adopt such a scheme, before -upgrade can be >> made safe... > > I've looked briefly at /local/bin/sage-update. Something that I think is > flawed is that if package B depends on A, and A is updated, B is not > recompiled.
Wrong. > > The 'deps' file only lists the dependencies, but not version numbers. Wrong. > > Looking at spkg/standard/deps, I see: > > $(INST)/$(FPLLL): $(BASE) $(INST)/$(MPIR) $(INST)/$(MPFR) > $(SAGE_SPKG) $(FPLLL) 2 >&1 > > Let's assume MPIR gets updated. It would be wise to recompile fplll, even if > its not necessary to do so. Knowing when it is necessary and when it is not > necessary, would be hard to know. Not true. The variable $(MPFR) is set to mpfr-version_number. > The other issue is that spkg/sandard/deps sometimes has inferred > dependencies. For example, Pyton depends on zlib. PolyBoRi depends on Pyton. > But zlib is not listed as a dependancy of PolyBori, though it is inferred > via python. What's wrong with that? I think make takes care of that automatically. > > IMHO, if zlib is rebuilt, python should, and so polybori rebuilt. At the > moment, neither will happen if I've understood things correctly. Perhaps you don't. > It would be useful if a failed upgrade could be worked on, to try to get it > to work, rather then just say "It's failed, so I'll rebuild from scratch". A failed upgrade can be worked on. I've had failed upgrades, and in that case I fix them. Since I know Sage well, I can always fix them. William > > Dave > >> On Jun 9, 11:10 am, David Kirkby<david.kir...@onetel.net> wrote: >>> >>> On 6 June 2010 11:47, François Bissey<f.r.bis...@massey.ac.nz> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>> On 06/ 6/10 10:53 AM, François Bissey wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You could also try >>> >>>>>>>> sage -ba >>> >>>>>>>> which will rebuild from scratch all Cython code. >>> >>>>>>> OK I will give it a go. >>> >>>>>> No improvement. I am considering this upgrade officially failed >>>>>> on my machine. >>> >>>>>> Francois >>> >>>>> Can anyone tell me what happens in a 'sage -upgrade'? I'm puzzled why >>>>> this >>>>> can't be made to work. I would have thought as a minimum one would need >>>>> to >>> >>>>> 1) Rebuild any new standard packages. >>>>> 2) Rebuild any standard package which depends on another package which >>>>> has >>>>> been upgraded. >>>>> 3) Rebuild the library. >>> >>>>> Is '(2)' being done? If not, I suspect it would be more reliable. >>>> >>>> I would think it is done that way. Although sometimes there are >>>> difficulties. >>>> It's possible that I didn't actually found the right culprit in this >>>> case. >>>> pynac only depends on python so there's not much to rebuild. >>>> The list of updated package is very short so this is puzzling but bugs >>>> in upgrading system happen. Possibly in this case something went subtly >>>> wrong from 4.4.1->4.4.2->4.4.3 >>> >>> It just that >>> >>> a) Permitting upgrades, rather than a total reinstall, was a good idea >>> of William's. (At least I think it was his idea. If not, I apologise >>> to whoevers idea it was). >>> b) It sometimes fails, which makes it far less useful. >>> c) When it does fail, you end up with a screwed up installation of Sage. >>> d) Other projects seem able to manage upgrades. I've never had an >>> upgrade of Firefox or Thunderbird fail, despite I allow automatic >>> updates. >>> >>> I've had updates of OpenSolaris fail, but in that case it does at >>> least clone the boot environment first, so if the upgrade fails, one >>> just picks the previous entry on the grub menu, and one goes back to >>> the previous version of the operating system. The system is >>> unavailable for only the time it takes to reboot. twice - first to the >>> failed installation, then back to the previous installation. One can >>> continue to use the operating system during the upgrade, just as one >>> can with Windows live updates. >>> >>> Dave >>> >>> Dave >> > > -- > 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 > -- William Stein Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org -- 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
