On Tuesday, February 12, 2013 2:38:26 AM UTC+1, kcrisman wrote:
> > Thanks to JP Flori and a number of other people on finding better flags > etc. for Cygwin, you might be surprised about some of the spkgs now on > Windows, they might not need as much work as before.. can't speak for Pari > and/or libGAP, though! > Sage always build on Cygwin with patches, indeed my first contribution way back in the day in 2007 or so was a build fix for Sage on Cygwin. The problem from my point of view is: (a) limit address space, i.e. about 1.5 GB max last time I checked (b) absolutely horrible build time since fork() performance on Windows utterly sucks, i.e. run a configure script on a Cygwin host and you want to kill yourself. I build Sage 4.0 on Cygwin in 2009 and it took me 36 hours from start to a sage prompt and the problem was not fixing the few build issues, but waiting for the damn thing to compile. If you want to see a fast compiler, especially C++, check out MSVC. It does not have the best reputation, but compiling template heavy code for example with it is an absolute pleasure compared to g++ from a time as well as a memory consumption point of view. It surely has its own issues (C99 support, parsing very long lines, linking with LTO consumes plenty of resources, etc), but overall it is a pretty decent compiler. The move Cygwin -> MinGW/MSVC is all about moving away from POSIX-y interfaces. And convincing upstream to integrate those changes can be tricky. And that is a fight I do not want to fight :p. Cheers, Michael -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
