On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 18:21:40 John H Palmieri wrote: > On Thursday, March 8, 2012 4:49:12 PM UTC-8, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > It turns out that here Apple is not doing anything wrong. > > (after having a discussion here: > > https://discussions.apple.com/message/17795537) > > > > It's improper use of BLAS by CVXOPT people that triggers errors. > > The C code in question violates BLAS convention that incx=0 in these > > kinds of BLAS functions is illegal. > > Please see p.30, 1st paragraph of Sect. 2.5.3. > > http://www.netlib.org/blas/blast-forum/chapter2.pdf > > > > There is also a description of xAXPBY function (which is a slight > > extension of xAXBY which you presume to be buggy) on p.47 which says > > that if incx (or incy) is set to 0 then an error flag must be raised. > > > > So this is a CVXOPT bug, as far as I can see, Apple BLAS is not guilty > > here. > > > > So it seems that we can proceed without Atlas on OSX 10.7, after all... > > Oh well. > > Darn, I was looking forward to adding 6 hours to the Sage build time on my > OS X 10.7 machines. > > Any ideas on when there might be a cvxopt fix? There is already a cvxopt-1.1.4 (sage currently ship 1.1.3) do we now if it is also buggy? My experience from sage-on-gentoo is that going to 1.1.4 is just a matter of dropping a new spkg - no patch to sage are necessary.
Francois -- 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
