On 10/25/10 05:05 PM, John Cremona wrote:
Your suggestions all look very sensible to me -- go for it (provided
several other people agree, of course).
John
Well several others did agree, with very few negative comments, so I have gone
ahead and done this.
There was already a page listing supported platforms, so I have edited that, and
deleted my "suggestions" page. The revised page is here.
http://wiki.sagemath.org/SupportedPlatforms
It lists clearly what we test on
I added (mainly for developers), a link to each of the relevant buildbots.
Compiling that page, several things hit me when I added links to the buildbots.
1) Despite previously claiming in README.txt that we supported Fedora 32-bit on
x86, the only host with Fedora 32-bit,
http://build.sagemath.org/sage/buildslaves/cicero-1
has never had a successful build and test.
2) Despite previously claiming we supported Fedora 64-bit on x86, the only
Opteron machine
http://build.sagemath.org/sage/buildslaves/flavius-1
has never had a successful build+test. Perhaps there's an Opteron specific bug
here.
3) There are a huge number of Fedora 13 64-bit machine, but a distinct lack of
older Fedora builds, or some very common platforms that we previously claimed to
support (Debian, Mandriva, Arch, Centros).
IMHO we should refrain from updating every machine to the latest version, and at
least keep an older version or two around if possible.
4) We don't have any Redhat machine on x86 - only Itanium.
There's also an 'errata' page, where we can list any issues we find after a Sage
release is made.
http://wiki.sagemath.org/errata
I hope that is an improvement over the current situation. It should now be very
easy to see what systems we are not testing on, but it would be desirable to
test on.
Dave
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 3:09 PM, David Kirkby<david.kir...@onetel.net> wrote:
As has been remarked before, Sage has number lists of "supported
platforms", no two of which agree with each other.
I proposed some time ago we break the list into 3
1) Fully supported - every Sage release is tested on it.
2) Expected to work
3) Probably will not work, but porting work in ongoing
See
http://wiki.sagemath.org/suggested-for-supported-platforms
Now we have a build bot for Sage, it is relatively easy to test every
release of Sage on a number of systems. Currently there are 17 systems
on which Sage is being built.
http://build.sagemath.org/sage/waterfall
I suggest that we provide a page like
http://wiki.sagemath.org/suggested-for-supported-platforms
but put those 17 systems into the "Fully supported". That means the
exact versions of the operating systems would be given, and not just
"Fedora" or "Ubunta", OS X or Solaris.
Then, we move into the "Expected to work" category, recent
distributions of these systems, and any older ones we might expect to
work, but do not actually test on.
Any attempt to say we support "the latest release" of a distribution
is IMHO unwise, as we can't possibly do this. Linux distributions come
out all the time, and often break. Apparently Sage has been broken for
some time on OpenSUSE 11.2 and 11.3.
We should then have an errata page like
http://wiki.sagemath.org/errata
to let people know of any issues that are discovered after the release.
Does this sound reasonable to everyone? If so, I am willing to collect
the exact information about all the systems in the buildbot, and add
them to the "Fully supported". (I'm assuming that Sage can be made to
pass all tests on all the hardware on the buildbots, though if that is
not so, then that system would obviously not be placed in the "Fully
supported" section).
Given we have a buildbot, it should be fairly easy to create binaries
for all these systems too, and make the binaries available.
We really *must* get ride of all these different lists of "supported"
systems and have one single list, and as many links to that list as we
want. Then the list only needs to get updated in one place.
If we can get agreement on this, I'll do the work, but I'm not going
to waste my time finding out the right information, if there are going
to be endless arguments of what we support. To me, fully supporting
what we can easily test on is the right way to proceed.
Since Minh has been using an external server (I think run by GNU) for
Debian, we can probably add Debian at some point if we can get
permission to run a buildbot slave there.
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
--
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
