On Dec 17, 3:58 am, "Craig Citro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Sage 2.9 has been released. It is available at
>
> > http://sagemath.org/download.html
>
> So this built with no reported errors on my Mac Pro (Intel, 10.4.11).
> However, make check reported one error:
>
> sage -t devel/sage-main/sage/stats/test.py
> **********************************************************************
> File "test.py", line 5:
> sage: import rpy
> Exception raised:
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "/Users/craigcitro/sage-2.9/local/lib/python2.5/doctest.py",
> line 1212, in __run
> compileflags, 1) in test.globs
> File "<doctest __main__.example_0[0]>", line 1, in <module>
> import rpy###line 5:
> sage: import rpy
> ImportError: No module named rpy
> **********************************************************************
> 1 items had failures:
> 1 of 1 in __main__.example_0
> ***Test Failed*** 1 failures.
>
> Looking at the install.log, it turns out that rpy failed to build, but
> this error wasn't propogated back to the r-2.6.1.p6 make process. So
> there are two issues:
>
> 1) Why did rpy fail?
> 2) Should this stop the build of R, or at least inform the user more
> noticeably?
>
> For (1), the answer was easy: the rpy setup.py uses "tail -1" for
> "tail -n 1", which fails on some systems (namely mine). I'm running
> the most current version of textutils:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~/sage-2.9/spkg/standard] $ tail --version
> tail (textutils) 2.1
> Written by Paul Rubin, David MacKenzie, Ian Lance Taylor, and Jim Meyering.
>
> Copyright (C) 2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
> warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
>
> That's the most recent version according to the webpage, but the same
> version is installed on sage.math, where tail -1 works just fine.
> (This might have to do with the POSIX settings when tail was compiled?
> I vaguely got this impression from the FAQ on the textutils webpage.)
> So I'll report this upstream, but I suspect I should also add a patch
> to the rpy-1.0.1.spkg we ship, because I doubt I'm the only one with
> this issue. This is now trac ticket #1543, with a new rpy-1.0.1.spkg
> attached (since there's no mercurial repository in the spkg).
>
> 2) I would assume that we should halt the build if rpy fails for any
> reason; this is a simple 3-line fix in spkg-install, which I'm going
> to post on trac right now. (...) It's trac ticket #1542, with the
> simple patch attached.
>
Hi Craig,
as just mentioned in IRC I will review those patches/spkgs tonight [my
tonight since it is very early here at the moment] and I think rlm
should stick those in 2.9.1. We just need to bumb the version number
of rpy and as you observed fix the rpy.spkg name in the R.spkg itself,
too.
> -cc
Cheers,
Michael
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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/
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
