On Saturday, March 16, 2013 8:00:30 PM UTC-7, Volker Braun wrote:
>
> Try "sage -docbuild all html" and see if it gets picked up. The two-step
> docbuild process might need that once if a new file is added.
You could also do (from SAGE_ROOT): 'rm -rf devel/sage/doc/output' first,
then 'sage -
Try "sage -docbuild all html" and see if it gets picked up. The two-step
docbuild process might need that once if a new file is added.
On Saturday, March 16, 2013 9:04:46 PM UTC-4, KnS wrote:
>
> Oops... May be I should be a little more precise:
>
> 1. I added to the index.rst in reference/log
Oops... May be I should be a little more precise:
1. I added to the index.rst in reference/logic -- the logicparser file by
adding the line sage/logic/logicparser at the appropriate place.
2. I edited the file sage.logic/logicparser.py
3. On the terminal, sage -docbuild reference/logic html
4. HTM
Kannappan Sampath wrote:
Hello!
While working on a ticket, I did the following:
I made two changes: added a new file to an index.rst and edited the file
I added. Then, without committing, I built the documentation. The
documentation was built but no changes I made was incorporated. I then
commi
Can you tell us the precise commands you used? Did you run "sage -docbuild
all html"
On Saturday, March 16, 2013 6:19:46 PM UTC-4, KnS wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> While working on a ticket, I did the following:
>
> I made two changes: added a new file to an index.rst and edited the file I
> added.
Oh, yes! I did!
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 5:28 AM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
>
> On Saturday, March 16, 2013 3:19:46 PM UTC-7, KnS wrote:
>>
>> Hello!
>>
>> While working on a ticket, I did the following:
>>
>> I made two changes: added a new file to an index.rst and edited the file
>> I added. The
On Saturday, March 16, 2013 3:19:46 PM UTC-7, KnS wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> While working on a ticket, I did the following:
>
> I made two changes: added a new file to an index.rst and edited the file I
> added. Then, without committing, I built the documentation. The
> documentation was built bu
Am Samstag, 16. März 2013 20:57:13 UTC+1 schrieb leif:
>
> Julien Puydt wrote:
> > The proposition isn't to fork sage to get it into a single distribution,
> > but to modify it with upstream so any distribution can easily package it
> > correctly.
>
> But if we switch to git, improve Sage's pa
Hello!
While working on a ticket, I did the following:
I made two changes: added a new file to an index.rst and edited the file I
added. Then, without committing, I built the documentation. The
documentation was built but no changes I made was incorporated. I then
committed the changes. But, now,
Just FYI, I received an Linux/OSX Intel MKL license (its closed-source
BLAS) for the Sage project . As I've written earlier, I'm planning to make
Sage more vendor-agnostic so we don't have ATLAS hardcoded everywhere.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Just a FYI, Intel gave me a license f
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to
On 2013-03-16 17:08, Tobias Hansen wrote:
> Thoughts about enhancing the build system?
I'm not sure whether this project is really feasible. Many people have
tried similar things in the past, but somehow never really managed. I
think it is *really* hard to do.
I think familiarity with build system
Paulo Andrade has done a ton of work packaging Sage for Fedora (1), which
is currently available as an experimental yum repository (2)
(1): https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877651
(2): http://pcpa.fedorapeople.org/sagemath/sagemath-f18.repo
I'm definitely in favor of this, pushing Sag
Julien Puydt wrote:
Le 16/03/2013 18:36, leif a écrit :
Julien Puydt wrote:
Le 16/03/2013 16:57, Tobias Hansen a écrit :
== Desirable skills: ==
familiarity with shell scripts, makefiles and C libraries
You forgot python.
Autotools, C++, Common Lisp / ECL, Cython, Perl, ... ? ;-)
Do they
Le 16/03/2013 18:36, leif a écrit :
Julien Puydt wrote:
Le 16/03/2013 16:57, Tobias Hansen a écrit :
== Desirable skills: ==
familiarity with shell scripts, makefiles and C libraries
You forgot python.
Autotools, C++, Common Lisp / ECL, Cython, Perl, ... ? ;-)
Do they know about Sage-on-Ge
Julien Puydt wrote:
Le 16/03/2013 16:57, Tobias Hansen a écrit :
== Desirable skills: ==
familiarity with shell scripts, makefiles and C libraries
You forgot python.
Autotools, C++, Common Lisp / ECL, Cython, Perl, ... ? ;-)
Do they know about Sage-on-Gentoo, Jan's Ubuntu PPA, ... ?
-lei
Le 16/03/2013 16:57, Tobias Hansen a écrit :
== Desirable skills: ==
familiarity with shell scripts, makefiles and C libraries
You forgot python.
Snark on #debian-science and #sagemath
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubsc
Hi fellow free software science guys!
I would like to propose a Google Summer of Code project to make the Sage
build system more distribution friendly. I am a Debian developer looking
for a co-mentor from Sage and possibly Fedora. We have to figure this
out until March 28th, when the mentoring org
18 matches
Mail list logo
