We already have sage 8.9 with Python 3 in Debian unstable. It is not migrating
to testing due to various crashes on i386, mipls64el and ppc64el but on amd64
it should work fine.
Best,
Tobias
On 10/15/19 10:50 AM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> This is a Debian-specific problem, I think they're working
On 1/5/19 1:18 PM, Thierry wrote:
> Hi,
>
> could Debian maintainers please explicitely tell us on the sage-devel
> mailing-list what should be done soon so that 8.6 could enter forthcoming
> buster release with recent dependencies (gap 4.10, etc) ? Also, what are
> the deadlines ?
>
> In particula
On 12/09/2016 09:54 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 02:50:15PM +0000, Tobias Hansen wrote:
>> On 12/07/2016 01:26 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>> If you look at the patch [1] that was applied, there is a new check for
>> tp_new(). I'm not 100% s
On 12/08/2016 04:05 PM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
>
> On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 1:59:11 PM UTC, tha...@debian.org wrote:
>
> The GNU Free Documentation License is not considered a free license
> by Debian. So if it's this, it can't be included in Debian. :(
>
> See
>
> htt
On 12/07/2016 01:26 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> What is the problem really? Neither from reading the bug report nor from
> reading this thread do I understand what exactly changed in Python
> 2.7.13 causing this breakage.
>
If you look at the patch [1] that was applied, there is a new check for
t
On 12/07/2016 11:07 AM, Tobias Hansen wrote:
> On 12/07/2016 10:57 AM, Francois Bissey wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/12/2016, at 21:15, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2016-12-07 04:17, Francois Bissey wrote:
>>>> But I am not sure how to do the
>
On 12/07/2016 10:57 AM, Francois Bissey wrote:
>
>> On 7/12/2016, at 21:15, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>>
>> On 2016-12-07 04:17, Francois Bissey wrote:
>>> But I am not sure how to do the
>>> __new__ = object.__new__ in cython.
>>
>> You certainly cannot do that since Cython's __new__ does non-trivia
On 12/07/2016 01:27 AM, François Bissey wrote:
> On 07/12/16 12:20, than...@debian.org wrote:
>> Hi sage-devel,
>>
>> we're almost ready to upload Sage to Debian (in fact we basically have
>> to upload it this week to make sure it's included in the next Debian
>> release).
>>
>> However, on Sunday
. However I think the lesson is that
/dev/shm must not only exist and be user writable, but mounted to a tmpfs.
Best,
Tobias
Am 07.03.2015 um 14:26 schrieb Tobias Hansen:
> Maybe this was not clear from my first mail: When I set the number of
> processes to two or more, not a single test is s
Maybe this was not clear from my first mail: When I set the number of
processes to two or more, not a single test is started. And there are
enough resources available, at least to start some tests.
Am 07.03.2015 um 14:16 schrieb Volker Braun:
> The parallel doctester doesn't error out in some inst
Hi,
I am experimenting with building Sage in a Debian unstable chroot and
have a hard time figuring out why parallel doctesting does not work.
I wonder if it has something to do with the chroot. I already run into
the problem that /dev/shm was not user-writable and fixed that. The
script from [1]
]. So what do you think? Any tickets that definitely should/should not
be merged? Felix, could you maybe give a summary of the most important
tickets?
Cheers,
Tobias Hansen
[1] http://trac.sagemath.org/query?reporter=felixs
[2] http://wiki.debian.org/DebianScience/Sage
--
You received this message
On 04/24/2013 11:46 AM, Felix Salfelder wrote:
part of my proposal is
to make it possible to just install sage ("the distribution") skipping
everything but the core modules and the notebook.
So your plan is to make it possible to run configure and make for each
directory in /src separately, bu
On 04/22/2013 11:14 AM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
On 04/22/2013 09:57 AM, Felix Salfelder wrote:
do you see disadvantages in treating sage parts as modules?
It doesn't even make sense to treat them as modules, since they are not
independent. libcsage means nothing without the Sage Python library, t
Am 12.04.2013 10:25, schrieb Felix Salfelder:
> Hi there.
>
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 11:48:17PM +0200, Tobias Hansen wrote:
>>> so theres the inevitable question to ask:
>>> would it be an option to eventually split c_lib and the python modules
>>> to differ
Let's drop debian-science from CC. For those interested, the thread on
sage-devel is at
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/sage-devel/1HGbf4EZGb0
Am 11.04.2013 22:27, schrieb Felix Salfelder:
> in debian, one source package can create multiple binary packages.
> this for example m
Am 10.04.2013 17:43, schrieb Felix Salfelder:
> several parts of fixing/changing/improving the sage (the system) build
> system is unrelated to distributing sage "the library". so "changes to
> the build system in Sage" is somewhat vague.
>
> i think a build system for the sage library should at le
Two people from Sage, Jeroen Demeyer and John Palmieri, volunteered to
cover the Sage side of mentoring the project. Julien Puydt, who already
put a lot of work into packaging Sage dependencies for Debian, is also
on board. All we need now is a student.
Cheers,
Tobias
--
You received this messag
have an
additional co-mentor from Fedora who tests the changes on Fedora and
gives feedback.
So, what do you say? Thoughts about enhancing the build system?
Co-maintainer volunteers?
Cheers,
Tobias Hansen
= Project Description =
== Description of the project: ==
The mathematics software system
19 matches
Mail list logo
