On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 10:52 PM, mabshoff wrote:
>
>
>
> On Jan 4, 10:39 pm, "William Stein" wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 9:24 PM, mabshoff wrote:
>
>
>
>> What about if we just don't install a shared readline at all? That
>> seems way safer to me than overwriting it with the system readl
On Jan 4, 10:39 pm, "William Stein" wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 9:24 PM, mabshoff wrote:
> What about if we just don't install a shared readline at all? That
> seems way safer to me than overwriting it with the system readline.
> In the spkg-install for readline, if the OS is OpenSuse,
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 9:24 PM, mabshoff wrote:
>
>
>
> On Jan 4, 9:15 pm, "William Stein" wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 9:01 PM, William Stein wrote:
>
>
>
>> OK, I found a temporary workaround. See the patch at #4934.
>
> Ok, I will take a look.
>
>> It would also be very nice if we coul
On Jan 4, 9:15 pm, "William Stein" wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 9:01 PM, William Stein wrote:
> OK, I found a temporary workaround. See the patch at #4934.
Ok, I will take a look.
> It would also be very nice if we could also fix the openSUSE build
> bug, since I think you said you kn
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 9:17 PM, mabshoff wrote:
> Cool. The dirty fix is to disable that doctest for now. If I ran the
That is very dirty indeed. I think I prefer at least the hack I've
posted to the ticket, which is to make the variable public.
> last doctest by itself it passed, running the
On Jan 4, 9:01 pm, "William Stein" wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 11:32 PM, mabshoff wrote:
> Your ticket #4934 segfault:
>
> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/4934
>
> which you were just seeing on cicero is popping up for me on several test
> os's on several compilers.
O
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 9:01 PM, William Stein wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 11:32 PM, mabshoff wrote:
>>
>> Hello folks,
>>
>> Sage 3.2.3.final is out, 3.2.3.rc0 was never announced on the list.
>> Well, technically the following happened: the first final had some
>> issues, so it was renamed
On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 11:32 PM, mabshoff wrote:
>
> Hello folks,
>
> Sage 3.2.3.final is out, 3.2.3.rc0 was never announced on the list.
> Well, technically the following happened: the first final had some
> issues, so it was renamed rc0 and a new final was spun with a number
> of fixes.
>
> Mos
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 6:35 PM, mabshoff wrote:
>
>
>
> On Jan 4, 6:21 pm, "William Stein" wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Justin C. Walker wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
>> I built on a CentOS 64-bit system with 1GB RAM, and a test in arith.py
>> fails due to swapping leading to a timeout. T
On Jan 4, 6:21 pm, "William Stein" wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Justin C. Walker wrote:
Hi,
> I built on a CentOS 64-bit system with 1GB RAM, and a test in arith.py
> fails due to swapping leading to a timeout. The test in question is a
> *massive* performance regression, I th
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Justin C. Walker wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 2, 2009, at 23:32 , mabshoff wrote:
>
>>
>> Hello folks,
>>
>> Sage 3.2.3.final is out, 3.2.3.rc0 was never announced on the list.
>> Well, technically the following happened: the first final had some
>> issues, so it was rename
On Jan 2, 2009, at 23:32 , mabshoff wrote:
>
> Hello folks,
>
> Sage 3.2.3.final is out, 3.2.3.rc0 was never announced on the list.
> Well, technically the following happened: the first final had some
> issues, so it was renamed rc0 and a new final was spun with a number
> of fixes.
>
> Most of
All tests passed on my 10.4 ppc (g4) mac laptop, except for
calculus.py timing out as usual.
-M. Hampton
On Jan 3, 1:32 am, mabshoff wrote:
> Hello folks,
>
> Sage 3.2.3.final is out, 3.2.3.rc0 was never announced on the list.
> Well, technically the following happened: the first final had some
mabshoff wrote:
> On Jan 3, 11:27�am, Robert Dodier wrote:
> > Hmm, what is "this possibility" ? I don't understand.
> I meant embedding Maxima into a library extensions via ecl. You stated
> to the best of my recollection that this would be troublesome due to
> asksign since there would be th
2009/1/3 John Cremona :
> Built fine and all tests pass on my 32-bit ubuntu laptop. In
And also on a 64-bit Suse
Linux version 2.6.18.8-0.3-default (ge...@buildhost) (gcc version
4.1.2 20061115 (prerelease) (SUSE Linux)) #1 SMP Tue Apr 17 08:42:35
UTC 2007
John
> particular, Atlas built fine a
15 matches
Mail list logo
