Re: [sage-devel] bug in modular symbols code?

2012-08-04 Thread William Stein
On Friday, August 3, 2012, Maarten Derickx wrote: > I think I found the problem. > Let M22=ModularSymbols(Gamma1(22)) and S22=M22.cuspidal_subspace() > and similarly let M2=ModularSymbols(Gamma1(2)) and M11=... etc > What goes wrong is that the code calculates the four degeneracy maps: > d1:M2 ->

Re: [sage-devel] fresh build of 5.2 from source on PIII, illegal instruction and wrong answers from ecm (factorisation)

2012-08-04 Thread Andrzej Giniewicz
I could have sworn that it worked before, but when I rebuilt ecm on 5.1 it no longer works... strange... diffing logs showed noting interesting, except for variable ECM_EXTRA_OPTS was renamed to ECM_CONFIGURE. Anyway, setting ECM_CONFIGURE=--disable-sse2 manually fixed the issue, seems that before

Re: [sage-devel] fresh build of 5.2 from source on PIII, illegal instruction and wrong answers from ecm (factorisation)

2012-08-04 Thread Jeroen Demeyer
On 2012-08-04 16:07, Andrzej Giniewicz wrote: > On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: >> On 2012-08-04 15:59, Andrzej Giniewicz wrote: >>> until 5.2 everything worked >>> and was quite usable when not used by more than 2 users at a time. >> And which is the last version of Sage whi

Re: [sage-devel] fresh build of 5.2 from source on PIII, illegal instruction and wrong answers from ecm (factorisation)

2012-08-04 Thread Jeroen Demeyer
On 2012-08-04 16:07, Andrzej Giniewicz wrote: > On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: >> On 2012-08-04 15:59, Andrzej Giniewicz wrote: >>> until 5.2 everything worked >>> and was quite usable when not used by more than 2 users at a time. >> And which is the last version of Sage whi

Re: [sage-devel] fresh build of 5.2 from source on PIII, illegal instruction and wrong answers from ecm (factorisation)

2012-08-04 Thread Andrzej Giniewicz
On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > On 2012-08-04 15:59, Andrzej Giniewicz wrote: >> until 5.2 everything worked >> and was quite usable when not used by more than 2 users at a time. > And which is the last version of Sage which worked for sure? Currently it runs 5.1 without i

Re: [sage-devel] fresh build of 5.2 from source on PIII, illegal instruction and wrong answers from ecm (factorisation)

2012-08-04 Thread Jeroen Demeyer
On 2012-08-04 15:59, Andrzej Giniewicz wrote: > until 5.2 everything worked > and was quite usable when not used by more than 2 users at a time. And which is the last version of Sage which worked for sure? -- -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe f

[sage-devel] fresh build of 5.2 from source on PIII, illegal instruction and wrong answers from ecm (factorisation)

2012-08-04 Thread Andrzej Giniewicz
Hi all, I'm running one of my Sage instances on quite old machine, 2xPentium III 1GHz. It doesn't even have sse2, but until 5.2 everything worked and was quite usable when not used by more than 2 users at a time. Today I tried to update and it compiled fine, but I got following doctest failures co

Re: [sage-devel] Re: should we check for openssl in prereq?

2012-08-04 Thread Volker Braun
This is precisely my point, for some reason dpkg-architecture is not installed by default, while dpkg is of course installed by default. So prereq should check that it is. AFAIR Python will silently compile to a very reduced featurese because it can't find multiarch libraries, which is why this

Re: [sage-devel] Re: should we check for openssl in prereq?

2012-08-04 Thread Jan Groenewald
Hi Seems dpkg-architecture is in dpkg-dev not dpkg. 0 jan@osprey:~$dpkg -S dpkg-architecture dpkg-dev: /usr/share/man/es/man1/dpkg-architecture.1.gz dpkg-dev: /usr/share/man/de/man1/dpkg-architecture.1.gz dpkg-dev: /usr/share/man/sv/man1/dpkg-architecture.1.gz dpkg-dev: /usr/share/man/pl/man1/dpkg