30 minutes was just the time to build the ~10
spkgs that weren't being dealt with as packages -- this was with using
system packages for all the dependencies (I imagine your number is for
building the whole thing?)
-Tim Abbott
>
> -- William
>
> > direct from
hat just bundles
all the dependencies (it's much easier to do, but would not be suitable
for inclusion in Debian).
Best regards,
-Tim Abbott
On Thu, 5 Aug 2010, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> retitle 573538 RM: sagemath -- RoQA; broken and outdated; RC-buggy
> reassign 573538 ftp
ain as needed.
Is anyone interested in organizing the effort?
-Tim Abbott
p.s. when replying to this thread, please try to not drop all the other
lists from the thread.
On Sat, 8 May 2010, Rogério Brito wrote:
> Hi, Tim.
>
> I see that you don't seem to have the time to package
he calculus functionality, though).
I don't like the current situation any more than you do, but the Ubuntu
archive maintainers' policy isn't unreasonable, even if it is frustrating.
[1] Where do I get the number thousands? The Ubuntu popularity contest
shows 1300 installations of sagemat
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010, Tim Abbott wrote:
> As I mentioned on the bug report opened today at
> <http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=573538>, I'm talking to
> a member of the Ubuntu stable release update team who I know to see what
> the procedure would be
as that progresses.
(Please note I am not directly subscribed to sage-devel, so you will need
to directly CC me or debian-sage@ if you want me to see your replies in
real time).
-Tim Abbott
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from t
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009, William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Tim Abbott wrote:
> > (Note that I'm not directly subscribed to this list and do not have
> > the time to read it regularly, so you may want to CC me directly if
> > you want to ensure I see yo
me to read it regularly, so you may want to CC me directly if
you want to ensure I see your replies. I continue to wish that sage-
devel was managed like the LKML.)
-Tim Abbott
On Oct 25, 1:45 am, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> On Oct 24, 2009, at 6:08 PM, Dan Drake wrote:
>
>
>
> >
it was
split out into its own spkg several releases ago.
In fact, it seems that the extcode spkg still has _two_ copies of jsmath,
in particular:
extcode-4.1.2/jsmath
and
extcode-4.1.2/notebook/javascript/jsmath
-Tim Abbott
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To p
be
happy to do what I can to braindump how things work and mentor them.
Otherwise, I think it is safe to assume that it will be at least a few
months more before a major version update happens.
-Tim Abbott
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, s
ial progress on updating to
Sage 3.4.1 back in May, but have been extremely busy since then and do not
expect to find the several days of time I'd need to finish that process
anytime soon.
-Tim Abbott
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send a
bout a month from now. Does that fit with your time
> table?
>
> After that we ought to have 4.1 which should deal with the category
> patches, etc.
That schedule sounds reasonable to me. To be honest, I'm incredibly
busy right now with my startup (Ksplice) and so I can't ma
hat those are, however, because the .spkg in Sage
3.4.1 seems to have a bunch of patches that don't do anything (i.e. the
file being copied in is replacing an identical file). Did someone
accidentally overwrite the copies in the upstream directory, or did the
patches all get
hould Maxima be considered "free".
It is in Debian main. The following debian-legal thread about Maxima is
relevant:
http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-le...@lists.debian.org/msg16552.html
-Tim Abbott
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this gro
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009, David Joyner wrote:
> It's great having Sage available from apt-get. Many thanks to Tim
> Abbott for doing such a great job.
> As a minor suggestion, I wonder if it is possible to add Sage as a
> menu item in the next version?
I think that asking for broad
upport tries to byte-compile everything needing
it every time you install a package using it, and it is quite likely that
some newly installed sage dependency uses python-support.
-Tim Abbott
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to
7 still does not build on Solaris or
> the current Mandriva release without using an ancient compiler, i.e.
> on Solaris/Sparc you need gcc 3.2.3 to get a somewhat working clisp.
Okay, so it is indeed currently unused but that is expected to change
soon. Good to know. Thanks,
Hello,
I was wondering why boehm_gc is a standard Sage package. It seems that it
isn't actually a dependency of anything in spkg/standard/deps; is that
because it is only used by the sage library and a there's a missing
dependency, or is something else going on?
-
dd ticket link for existing spkg
> updates and open tickets for the issues that are not in trac yet.
Great! I hope to do some investigation tomorrow as to what other work is
needed in this space.
-Tim Abbott
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, sen
just dropping the issue since
> I have plenty of other things to do.
Right, I should expect to have a sampling bias problem where I only notice
when the patches don't end up upstream promptly :)
-Tim Abbott
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this gr
very long time. We should upgrade to the latest release of
> scipy now, though.
If people have time to do these updates before the Sage 4.0 release, I
would be grateful.
-Tim Abbott
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-de
.
It sounds like you are planning to work to avoid these types of problems
in the future, which is all that's important to me here.
-Tim Abbott
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from
with
programs like pari when necessary -- you just have two versions of the
pari package that conflict with each other. Generally something to be
avoided if possible.
It sounds possible that Pari has internal disagreements about releasing
that might justify this sort of thi
mpletely unaware of the
patch's existence. Maybe I've been unlucky in my sampling, but I get the
sense that Sage development does not currently react to merging a new
ABI-changing patch with "we should send this upstream ASAP".
-Tim Abbott
--~--~-~--~~
ifdef CYGWIN
...
#endif
or similar that can be safely assumed on inspection to be harmless on
Linux. If Sage only is applying patches like this, it is easy to just use
the upstream release Sage is patching. That's why I stated the goal of
cleaning out all ABI-changing p
st 4.0 though.
Yeah, I'm mostly concerned about the long-term issues here.
-Tim Abbott
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.c
e and then installed them.
I think it would be hard to avoid violating Debian policy with such a
package, and even if it did not, I suspect the Debian community would
frown on such an arrangement for a piece of software in the main (free
software)
both of these things in the next 3 weeks
if we start soon.
-Tim Abbott
On Wed, 22 Apr 2009, mabshoff wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> while there should be a quick 3.4.2 to mop up patches from trac before
> the big 4.0 jump today we had a planning session during the UW status
>
>From the point of view of packaging Sage for distributions, having Sage
able to use GMP rather than MPIR is a win, since it means packaging Sage
would not require adding MPIR to the distribution (adding MPIR is one of
the blockers for packaging a more recent Sage in Debian).
-
n upstream
sources could then be packaged by the various distributions without an
unreasonable amount of work getting Sage's changes merged upstream.
> But most of all: what is wrong with building from source in any linux
> distribution?
Having to compile from source is too high a bar
either, so if you do, please let me know. If you run into any other
problems running the package on jaunty, please report a bug using Ubuntu's
bug tracker (http://bugs.launchpad.net).
-Tim Abbott
--
Maxima in Ubuntu Jaunty is somewhat crashy; I think the pr
I'm guessing your issue is too old m4ri. Try upgrading to libm4ri-dev
from jaunty.
-Tim Abbott
On Wed, 11 Mar 2009, R (Chandra) Chandrasekhar wrote:
>
> Dear Folks,
>
> I am on an AMD64 PC running Kubuntu Intrepid 8.04 and KDE4.2. The Linux
> kernel is 2.6.2
I mentioned that I'd send mail here again once the segfault problems are
fixed.
I believe that both of the crash-on-start problems with Sage 3.0.5 in
Debian are fixed in version 3.0.5dfsg-2, which is available in Debian sid.
-Tim Abbott
On Sun, 1 Feb 2009, Tim Abbott
f MPIR. Is it
possible to use GMP instead? Or alternatively, is there a stable MPIR
release yet?
(2) Sage seems to contain an spkg for "pynac", which is apparently a
python-integrated gynac, where Sage is the upstream source? Does it have
anything to do with this pynac: <http://sou
.spkg
format.
If someone wants to write bash completion rules for .spkg files, I'd
be happy to include them in the Debian package for Sage.
-Tim Abbott
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsu
.spkg works, but
whether tar -xf sage_scripts will complete the remainder of the
filename.
-Tim Abbott
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more o
the problem by getting the bash, midnight
commander, etc. upstreams to treat .spkg files as though they
were .tar.bz2 archives. I do worry that some upstreams may just
refuse to merge support for the .spkg extension, however.
-Tim Abbott
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~--
> somehow), I wonder if it is possible for someone sufficiently
> skillful to write a script which crawls through the *.spkg files
> and rewrites them in a new directory as files convenient for Tim Abbott to
> use. Is this doable, and if so would it help?
To be clear, the 3-line patch I
sue I probably should have mentioned in my original
email. One solution to that would be to always include the appended
p0 (or whatever) in the version number for Sage versions of packages.
Another would be to use the extension .spkg.tar.bz2.
-Tim Abbott
--~--~-~--~~-
e transition without e.g. making everyone
rebuild every package in their extant sage trees (which I suspect is the
largest practical concern).
-Tim Abbott
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe f
s, examples, extcode, etc., and could add pari to that list
if necessary). But I try to avoid this whenever possible; ideally,
these bugfixes should be sent to the upstream developer and fixed for
all Debian users, rather than just in Debian's Sage package.
-Tim Abbott
--~--~--
easy for them to only
change the soname when it is necessary (i.e. when an interface is
removed). The soname bumps are a nuisance for me as well, since
packages have to pass through the Debian NEW queue every time their
soname changes
-Tim Abbott
--~--~-~--~~~---~-
olyBoRi are aware of that problem (they fixed a
> similar issue for us with 0.3, but introduced another one in 0.5).
Good to know. I think that I won't have to do anything for this,
since I'm using the standard Sage build process for the sage library
(modulo using a different library pa
ago.
The zodb issue is a real problem; one cannot access the Sage databases
until it is fixed.
-Tim Abbott
On Sep 21, 9:19 am, Pablo De Napoli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Also there seems to be two blocker bugs...
>
> package zodb for python 2.25
> (http://bugs.debian.o
ll them).
One should be able to install optional sage spkgs using sage -i (as
root) from the Debian installation.
-Tim Abbott
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send emai
#x27;).
Any comments would be appreciated.
(I've noticed that SAGE has been replaced with Sage on the website,
and am
following that change in the package description).
-Tim Abbott
Package: sagemath
Priority: optional
Section: math
...
Description: Computer algebra system written in P
46 matches
Mail list logo
