>
> What is OX 11.?? I know that the Sage thread was titled OS X 11.11, but I
> thought that was a typo
>
>
Yes, it is a typo (my typo, sorry). The system is OS X 10.11 (El Capitan)
but I wrote "Sage in Mac OSX 11.11 (El Capitan)" in my message of July 14
on this list, when I noticed that
On Friday, 9 October 2015 00:38:37 UTC+2, William wrote:
>
> >>> On cygwin32 the result was decent.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> How many people *use* it?
> >
> > Not even me!
> > I guess it misses advertising, proper packaging, proper testing, proper
> > continuous integration, ...
>
> The last
>>> On cygwin32 the result was decent.
>>
>>
>>
>> How many people *use* it?
>
> Not even me!
> I guess it misses advertising, proper packaging, proper testing, proper
> continuous integration, ...
The last few times I spent months on Windows porting, the net result
of using Cygwin was -- in pract
On Friday, October 9, 2015 at 12:27:05 AM UTC+2, William wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thursday, October 8, 2015, Jean-Pierre Flori > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, October 8, 2015 at 9:10:17 PM UTC+2, William wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thursday, October 8, 2015, David Joyner wrote:
>>>
On Thu, Oct 8,
On Thursday, October 8, 2015, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote:
>
>
> On Thursday, October 8, 2015 at 9:10:17 PM UTC+2, William wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, October 8, 2015, David Joyner wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 2:58 PM, William Stein wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Thursday, October 8, 2015,
On Thursday, October 8, 2015 at 9:10:17 PM UTC+2, William wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thursday, October 8, 2015, David Joyner > wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 2:58 PM, William Stein wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thursday, October 8, 2015, David Joyner wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Before this thread drops off the r
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 20:32:20 UTC+2, David Joyner wrote:
>
> Before this thread drops off the radar, I have a question. How hard
> would it be to rebuild (not port) Sage starting with windows Python,
> then adding windows GAP, windows SIngular, networkxx, and
> SymPy+friends, of which G
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 2:58 PM, William Stein wrote:
>
>
> On Thursday, October 8, 2015, David Joyner wrote:
>>
>> Before this thread drops off the radar, I have a question. How hard
>> would it be to rebuild (not port) Sage starting with windows Python,
>> then adding windows GAP, windows SIngul
On Thursday, October 8, 2015, David Joyner wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 2:58 PM, William Stein > wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thursday, October 8, 2015, David Joyner > wrote:
> >>
> >> Before this thread drops off the radar, I have a question. How hard
> >> would it be to rebuild (not port) Sage st
On Thursday, October 8, 2015, David Joyner wrote:
> Before this thread drops off the radar, I have a question. How hard
> would it be to rebuild (not port) Sage starting with windows Python,
> then adding windows GAP, windows SIngular, networkxx, and
> SymPy+friends, of which GAP+Singular communi
On 2015-10-08 20:22, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
if it talks about changes, this means changes are allowed, no?
Well, in principle I agree, but it's safer not to assume anything.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this
Before this thread drops off the radar, I have a question. How hard
would it be to rebuild (not port) Sage starting with windows Python,
then adding windows GAP, windows SIngular, networkxx, and
SymPy+friends, of which GAP+Singular communicate with the Sage
terminal via pexpect? Call it WinSage 1.0
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 10:22:45 UTC-7, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> On 2015-10-08 19:06, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> > ok, so we can make nauty standard package!
>
> Not so fast. The copyright statement is still far from being
> GPL-compatible.
>
> First of all, this restriction is certainly agai
On 2015-10-08 19:06, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
ok, so we can make nauty standard package!
Not so fast. The copyright statement is still far from being GPL-compatible.
First of all, this restriction is certainly against the GPL: "you must
document any changes that you make to this program"
Secon
The other part of the copyright notice says "you must document any
changes". That's presumably GPL incompatible too though it is very
vague
On Thursday, October 8, 2015, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> ok, so we can make nauty standard package!
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: "Dim
ok, so we can make nauty standard package!
-- Forwarded message --
From: "Dima Pasechnik"
Date: 8 Oct 2015 10:05 am
Subject: Fwd: Re: nauty in Sage (was: Code generating finite posets of
given size (fwd))
To: "Dima Pasechnik"
Cc:
From: Brendan McKay
Date: 7 Oct 2015 11:48 pm
Su
Just to keep everybody aware of what is going on here:
- I tried to add a stopgap on a code that returns wrong results
- The stopgap was refused because it was "just before a stable
release" and people did not want to alarm the users by telling them
that Sage returns wrong results (even though it
On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 17:38:00 UTC+2, bluescarni wrote:
>
> Some random thoughts:
>
> - I am not so convinced the strategy of automatic long -> long long
> patching is actually feasible, I think in practice this is gonna be a big
> can of worms. Pushing upstream to fix their code is a mu
Actually, I suppose there is some common overlap, namely in those packages
which currently don't build on Windows 64 that don't have a posix layer
requirement. Those could be useful ports for both SageMath and for Julia.
So there is perhaps still some hope for something.
Bill.
On Thursday, 8 O
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 12:28:36 UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> On 2015-10-08 12:22, Bill Hart wrote:
> > Currently, projects like Gap require far too much posix to make it easy
> > to build them any other way but with the posix layer, and then it is no
> > longer a native application.
On 2015-10-08 12:22, Bill Hart wrote:
Currently, projects like Gap require far too much posix to make it easy
to build them any other way but with the posix layer, and then it is no
longer a native application.
There is one thing I don't understand in this whole discussion: what's
the problem
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 10:26:06 UTC+2, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, October 7, 2015 at 11:27:25 PM UTC+2, Bill Hart wrote:
>>
>> OK, after more reading I find that these are the main benefits of MSYS2
>> over Cygwin:
>>
>> * Support for interop with mingw-w64 built package
Hi Bill,
On 2015-10-07, Bill Hart wrote:
> 4GB of Ram should be enough for anyone. :-)
I have it on my laptop, and it is hardly enough to reasonably
build the Sage documentation with make -j2...
Cheers,
Simon
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-
On Wednesday, October 7, 2015 at 11:27:25 PM UTC+2, Bill Hart wrote:
>
> OK, after more reading I find that these are the main benefits of MSYS2
> over Cygwin:
>
> * Support for interop with mingw-w64 built packages.
> * Ability to switch from MSYS to MinGW mode by setting an environment
> vari
24 matches
Mail list logo
