To me this suggests that the slamd64 compilation problem Jean-Marc DREZET mentioned is 64bit library related. Yes, if you could try the 2.7.3 though, I think that might help narrow down the possibilities.
On 8/8/07, Daniel Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2.7.2 built perfectly fine, albeit slowly. However, and I could've offered > this earlier since Slam64 is all about the 64-bit architecture, I'm on a > lowly P3 @ 32 bits. I haven't tried 2.7.3 just yet, but I can later > (currently at work) if you think it'll help. > > > On 8/7/07, David Joyner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Does 2.7.3 compile from source for you? > > Do you have a 64bit machine? > > > > On 8/7/07, Daniel Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi, David, > > > > > > On 8/7/07, David Joyner < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Does anyone else on this list use slackware? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I use Slackware 11.0. > > > > > > Daniel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URLs: http://sage.math.washington.edu/sage/ and http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
