Is there a general policy on whether compiler flags should give the
best performance on a particular machine, or should the binaries work
on any similar system? I can see advantages in each.
For people working on one system, they might as well get the best
performance from Sage and use compiler f
On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 at 09:40PM +0200, Michael Abshoff wrote:
> 종현 정 wrote:
>
> > -> The direction field graph doesn't change the angle of arrows when
> > the aspect ratio, that is, the ratio of x's unit length and y's unit
> > length changes. The blue line and the field vectors should have the
> >
On Jun 8, 1:15 pm, "Dr. David Kirkby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jun 8, 6:04 pm, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > including iconv was
> > discussed in the past, but IIRC it is large and builds slow, so we
> > might just disable iconv support on certain platforms unless somebody
> >
Hello,
> 3) Next failure is polybori-0.3.1.p3
> Michael suggested the change:
>
> #!bin/sh" -> "#!/usr/bin/env bash"
>
> but that does NOT work for me. Numerous errors still appear but they
> are in C++ code and I don't know C++. I hope someone else can fix that
> one. (I will give access to one
On Jun 8, 1:55 pm, "Dr. David Kirkby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Dave,
> I've posted quite a few things here recently on my attempts to build
> Sage on Solaris. Here's my summary of the current issues in building
> SAGE 3.0.3.alpha1 under Solaris 10, listed in order of the failures.
>
> My
I know there is no immediate (if ever) intension to support HP-UX, but
while I was trying to build Sage on my Sun, I decided to try it on a
rp2470 with two 750MHz 8700 PA-RISC CPUs (td192.testdrive.hp.com on
the HP testdrive program)
http://www.testdrive.hp.com/
Anyway, not surprisingly the buil
Hello,
I just installed a package using easy_install. I can import said
package in a python interactive shell, but I cannot import the package
in sage. Closer inspection reveals that:
import sys
print sys.path # <-- FYI, sys.path is different in sage than in python
interpreter
Not sure if this
I've posted quite a few things here recently on my attempts to build
Sage on Solaris. Here's my summary of the current issues in building
SAGE 3.0.3.alpha1 under Solaris 10, listed in order of the failures.
My system is a Sun Blade 2000, 2 x 1.2 GHz, 8 GB RAM, running Solaris
10 update 4. GNU too
On Jun 8, 5:54 pm, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >http://www.testdrive.hp.com/
>
> I got an account there, but I got put off by the fact by you can only
> log in via telnet.
To be honest, I don't blame HP. The lack of security only affects
them, not you. If someone sniffs your passwor
On Jun 8, 6:04 pm, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> including iconv was
> discussed in the past, but IIRC it is large and builds slow, so we
> might just disable iconv support on certain platforms unless somebody
> comes up with a compelling reason that we need it :)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Michael
On Jun 7, 10:21 am, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Jun 7, 2008, at 1:10 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Hi Dave,
> > A lot of Sage compilation is about compiling different .spkg files.
> > Since these are independent of each other, I suspect these could be
> > compiled in parallel
On Jun 7, 11:08 pm, "Dr. David Kirkby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Jun 7, 2:20 pm, "Dr. David Kirkby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Dave,
> > I've now submitted this as a trac event - number 3381.
Good.
> >http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/3381#preview
>
> > Dave
>
> I noticed in
On Jun 8, 3:10 am, "Dr. David Kirkby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Dave,
> If one tries to build Sage on Solaris, there is a warning the Solaris
> operating system is not well supported and it's tricky to build on
> Solaris.
>
> **
> Machine:
If one tries to build Sage on Solaris, there is a warning the Solaris
operating system is not well supported and it's tricky to build on
Solaris.
**
Machine: SunOS kestrel 5.10 Generic_120011-14 sun4u sparc SUNW,Sun-
Blade-1000
Building or usin
On Jun 6, 10:05 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I never understood why Mathematica still supports HPUX other for
> historical reasons. And I would imagine most HPUX/Itanium boxen would
> run non-scientific workloads, i.e. databases.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Michael
Even more puzzling is why Math
>>1. Is there any thought of a smaller, more basic package, a sort
>> of "SAGE-lite"? I mean that I would be interested in basic algebraic
>> manipulation capabilities (up through calculus-type things) and maybe
>> basic graphing capabilities. I notice the full install requires quite
>> a bi
16 matches
Mail list logo
