Re: [sage-devel] Re: This platform lacks a functioning sem_open implementation This platform lacks a functioning sem_ope

sed system will potentially give you some trouble, so either > linking /dev/shm to /run/shm or changing the mount point might fix it, i.e. > >sudo rm -rf /dev/shm && sudo ln -s /run/shm /dev/shm > > I just checked on my Ubuntu 12.10 based box which I booted by

[sage-devel] Re: This platform lacks a functioning sem_open implementation This platform lacks a functioning sem_ope

On Wednesday, April 17, 2013 11:45:13 AM UTC+2, pang wrote: > > Hello! > > I have downloaded a sage 5.8 binary for an atom 64 bits server, and it > worked. > Until you invoke something that uses mulltiprocessing :) > Then I tried to build a secure server. It takes more work than it did >

[sage-devel] Re: Fix busted sage -valgrind

On Tuesday, February 12, 2013 5:28:54 AM UTC+1, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > If I were to do any work on Sage I would pick up where I left since in > 2009 > > I actually did a port of Sage 4.0 to a mixed MSVC/MingW environment to > the > > Please note that Cygwin did not stand still since

Re: [sage-devel] Fix busted sage -valgrind

On Tuesday, February 12, 2013 2:38:26 AM UTC+1, kcrisman wrote: > > Thanks to JP Flori and a number of other people on finding better flags > etc. for Cygwin, you might be surprised about some of the spkgs now on > Windows, they might not need as much work as before.. can't speak for Pari >

Re: [sage-devel] Fix busted sage -valgrind

On Monday, February 11, 2013 11:52:19 PM UTC+1, Volker Braun wrote: > > On Monday, February 11, 2013 8:22:00 PM UTC, mabshoff wrote: > >> These days unfortunately there are components like libgap which make a >> port significantly more work and due to the way memory is m

Re: [sage-devel] Fix busted sage -valgrind

a wrote: > >> > On 6 February 2013 22:02, Minh Nguyen > > wrote: > >> > > Hi Michael, > >> > > > >> > > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 8:13 AM, mabshoff > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > >> it has been

[sage-devel] Re: Fix busted sage -valgrind

On Thursday, February 7, 2013 3:48:01 AM UTC+1, jason wrote: > > On 2/6/13 7:26 PM, kcrisman wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 8:13 AM, mabshoff > > wrote: > > >> it has been a while, i.e.summer 2009 or so, and I no longer hav

[sage-devel] Re: Fix busted sage -valgrind

On Wednesday, February 6, 2013 10:41:25 PM UTC+1, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote: > > There's a ticket for valgrind upgrade to 3.8.1... > I guess it did not get merged because no one cares except a Mac user but > there is some trouble on Apple^TM because it is coded so that only Apple > copimler can b

[sage-devel] Fix busted sage -valgrind

Hello folks, it has been a while, i.e.summer 2009 or so, and I no longer have my trac account password nor do I recall the email address I used. Anyway, attached is a patch that fixes sage -valgrind. Did not see any ticket on track, but I noticed that at least the valgrind 3.8.1 spkg is coming

[sage-devel] Re: sage-4.0

On May 30, 10:20 am, William Stein wrote: > 2009/5/30 Andrzej Giniewicz : > > > > > Hi, > > > tried to do some test, but I have similar issue as Vlad reported on > > sage-support for 4.0rc0 in topic "building sage 4.0.rc0 with gcc 4.4.0 > > and glibc 2.10.1 fails (on arch linux)", (btw, I also

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0.rc2 released!

On May 30, 12:51 am, John Cremona wrote: > 2009/5/30 Alex Ghitza : > > On my dell laptop running archlinux, my build from scratch fails at > > eclib.  I've extracted the relevant part from install.log and posted > > it at > > >http://www.ms.unimelb.edu.au/~aghitza/part_of_install.log > > > Thi

[sage-devel] Taking a break from release management

Hello folks, for various reasons I am taking a break from release management. Post 4.0.rc0 I have merged only a few patches that can be found in http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mabshoff/release-cycles-4.0/rc1/ and should simply be reimported. It would also be good if someone could deal

[sage-devel] Re: sage-4.0.alpha0 build failure on OS X PPC

On May 21, 1:19 am, gsw wrote: > Hi, > using ABI="32" >       CC="gcc -std=gnu99" >       CFLAGS="-O2 -mpowerpc -no-cpp-precomp -force_cpusubtype_ALL" >       CPPFLAGS="" >       CXX="g++" >       CXXFLAGS="-O2 -mpowerpc -no-cpp-precomp -force_cpusubtype_ALL" >       MPN_PATH=" powerpc32/vmx

[sage-devel] Re: 2d math input

On May 22, 11:24 am, William Stein wrote: > 2009/5/22 Bill Page : > > > > > It might be a stretch to fit this into the Sage NoteBook but the > > MathDox formula editor > > >  http://www.mathdox.org/formulaeditor/ > > > might be a good starting point. > > To me that looks less capable and more u

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0.rc0 released!

On May 22, 1:46 am, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote: > mabshoff wrote: > > Hi, > > > I gotta run to the airport, but sources and upgrade bits of 4.0.rc0 > > are in > > >    http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mabshoff/release-cycles-4.0/rc0/ >

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0.rc0 released!

On May 21, 8:11 pm, John H Palmieri wrote: > On May 21, 7:14 am, mabshoff wrote: > > > Hi, > > > I gotta run to the airport, but sources and upgrade bits of 4.0.rc0 > > are in > > >    http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mabshoff/release-cycles-4.0/rc0/

[sage-devel] Sage 4.0.rc0 released!

Hi, I gotta run to the airport, but sources and upgrade bits of 4.0.rc0 are in http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mabshoff/release-cycles-4.0/rc0/ Once I get online I will post more info, but I am sure this will take a couple hours. Sorry. Cheers, Michael Merged in Sage 4.0.rc0: #6104

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.4 Installation error (due to gmp-mpir-0.9's installation ) on Playstation 3 (with Ubuntu 8.10 Linux)

On May 19, 3:49 pm, David Harvey wrote: > On May 19, 11:41 pm, mabshoff wrote: > > > Well, in this case it is completely ironic that the zn_poly 0.9 code > > in FLINT is compiled, but not used since it causes a doctest failure > > in the Monsky code. When using

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0 release plan ; categories

On May 20, 3:00 pm, "Nicolas M. Thiery" wrote: > > I won't be there by 3:00, but later this afternoon would be good. > > Sounds good; I did not get food yet, and this is becoming urgent. Just > setup a time, and I'll be there! > > > I would like to build this on top of a nearly-complete 4.0 to

[sage-devel] Re: C library for SCSCP

On May 20, 12:11 am, Mickael Gastineau wrote: > Hi Michael, Hi Mickael, > After a check with the authors of the CeCILL-C license, they confirm > that CeCILL-C is not immediately compatible with the GPL. > But the CeCILL-C is compatible by transitivity with the GPL. The > derived software from

[sage-devel] Re: CGAL computational geometry libraries

On May 20, 6:41 am, bourbabis wrote: > Hello Sage team. Hi, > While doing some engineering calculations with Sage, I've encountered > some problems requiring "computational geometry" algorithms. So I've > snooped around and found "CGAL". Are you aware this set of tools > exists ? It seems VER

[sage-devel] Re: sage-4.0.alpha0 build failure on OS X PPC

On May 19, 5:34 pm, Kevin Horton wrote: > Sorry about the last one - blasted Send button > > On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 8:28 PM, mabshoff wrote: > > > On May 19, 5:22 pm, Kevin Horton wrote: > > > Should sage-4.0.alpha0 build on OS X 10.5 PPC? > > > Yes, i

[sage-devel] Re: sage-4.0.alpha0 build failure on OS X PPC

On May 19, 5:22 pm, Kevin Horton wrote: > Should sage-4.0.alpha0 build on OS X 10.5 PPC? Yes, it should. What XCode release are you using? > -- > Kevin Horton > Ottawa, Canada Cheers, Michael --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-dev

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.4 Installation error (due to gmp-mpir-0.9's installation ) on Playstation 3 (with Ubuntu 8.10 Linux)

On May 19, 1:24 pm, David Harvey wrote: > On May 19, 11:17 pm, David Harvey wrote: > Sorry, in case (1), I should have said, there is no easy fix from > within zn_poly itself. If Sage is not supposed to be compiling with > unsigned long != mp_limb_t, then if you can figure out how to make i

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.4 Installation error (due to gmp-mpir-0.9's installation ) on Playstation 3 (with Ubuntu 8.10 Linux)

On May 19, 1:17 pm, David Harvey wrote: > On May 19, 1:58 pm, Ralf-Philipp Weinmann > wrote: > > > zn_poly/pack.c:86:2: error: #error Not nails-safe yet > > zn_poly/pack.c:168:2: error: #error Not nails-safe yet > > zn_poly/pack.c:252:2: error: #error Not nails-safe yet > > zn_poly/pack.c:351:

[sage-devel] Re: sage-4.0.alpha0 build failure on Atom (EeePC 901)

On May 19, 12:45 pm, Kevin Horton wrote: > On 19 May 2009, at 11:45, mabshoff wrote: > > > On May 19, 6:31 am, Kevin Horton wrote: > >> As an experiment, I attempted to build sage-4.0.alpha0 on an EeePC   > >> 901 > >> Linux, with the stock Xandros OS.

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.4 Installation error (due to gmp-mpir-0.9's installation ) on Playstation 3 (with Ubuntu 8.10 Linux)

On May 19, 3:58 am, Ralf-Philipp Weinmann wrote: > On Mar 31, 8:12 pm, Bill Hart wrote: > Hi Bill, > > I just tried compiling SAGE 3.4.2 on a PS3 (Fedora Core 9). It bombs > out during the compilation of FLINT: > > gcc -std=c99 -I/home/rpw/sage-3.4.2/local/include/ -I/home/rpw/ > sage-3.4.2

[sage-devel] Re: sage-4.0.alpha0 build failure on Atom (EeePC 901)

On May 19, 6:31 am, Kevin Horton wrote: > As an experiment, I attempted to build sage-4.0.alpha0 on an EeePC 901   > Linux, with the stock Xandros OS.  The build failed with: > I'm not sure what other info is relevant to provide. Look for install.log, compress it, upload it somewhere and po

[sage-devel] Re: libfplll 3.0.12 fails on Solaris (SPARC) with Sage 4.0.alpha0

On May 19, 4:54 am, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote: > mabshoff wrote: > Is there any chance of you sending me the patch? Don't bother if rc0 is > going to be out in the next day or two. 4.0.rc0 was supposed to drop last night, but I had been up for 22 hours and did not fe

[sage-devel] Re: strange behaviour with SAGE_LOCAL/lib/python2.5/site.py

On May 18, 8:43 pm, Minh Nguyen wrote: > Hi folks, > python setup.py install --home="$SAGE_LOCAL" --force This should not be needed, i.e python setup.py install should just work. Re site.py - http://pypi.python.org/pypi/workingenv.py seems to indicate your environment is messed up. Ch

[sage-devel] Re: A little Mac OS program that launches SAGE running in local notebook mode...

On May 18, 5:50 pm, William Stein wrote: > On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 5:40 PM, mabshoff wrote: > > There is already code in Sage to create a Sage app since Sage 3.3, but > > it needs some more polish and hasn't been turned on per default. But > > feel free to send

[sage-devel] Re: A little Mac OS program that launches SAGE running in local notebook mode...

On May 18, 5:35 pm, Jonathan wrote: Hi Jonathan, > I've been using SAGE with one of my chemistry classes this last > semester and in the process wrote a little AppleScript that launches > SAGE and starts the notebook in local mode.  I think this is a little > easier to deal with than the pres

[sage-devel] Re: Sage Horizon (comments)

On May 18, 10:03 am, mabshoff wrote: > On May 18, 9:50 am, Ondrej Certik wrote: > > > On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 9:29 AM, Brian Granger > > wrote: > > > > > > But, if in the medium term (as Michael is hoping for), the Sage build > > > system can

[sage-devel] Re: Sage Horizon (comments)

On May 18, 9:50 am, Ondrej Certik wrote: > On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 9:29 AM, Brian Granger > wrote: > > But, if in the medium term (as Michael is hoping for), the Sage build > > system can be improved to the point where both Sage and SPD are using > > the same infrastructure, that would hel

[sage-devel] Re: Sage Horizon (comments)

On May 18, 9:29 am, Brian Granger wrote: > > Not right now.  I'm sure Michael Abshoff would agree that we are way > > too busy just dealing with Sage itself. > > OK, I am not surprised - Sage is an ambitious undertaking. Well, world domination isn't something for weekend warriors ;) > > Howev

[sage-devel] Re: Sage Horizon (comments)

On May 18, 9:08 am, William Stein wrote: > On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 8:35 AM, Brian Granger > wrote: > > > From a development perspective, it makes no sense to have two separate > > projects (Sage/SPD).  In working on SPD, I have already run into small > > bugs in Sage's infrastructure.  Curren

[sage-devel] Re: 'report bug' link on sagemath.org?

On May 18, 8:06 am, Franco Saliola wrote: > On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Harald Schilly > > wrote: > > > On May 18, 2:50 pm, mabshoff wrote: > >> Just put in a link to the wiki to a new page called > > >>    http://wiki.sagemath.org/support/Repo

[sage-devel] Re: Sage Horizon (comments)

On May 18, 6:37 am, mabshoff wrote: > On May 18, 6:17 am, Kevin Horton wrote: > > > On 18 May 2009, at 02:02, William Stein wrote: > > > > > Will packages created for SPD be usable as-is in Sage, or will they   > > need to be tweaked in some way before the

[sage-devel] Re: Sage Horizon (comments)

On May 18, 6:17 am, Kevin Horton wrote: > On 18 May 2009, at 02:02, William Stein wrote: > Will packages created for SPD be usable as-is in Sage, or will they   > need to be tweaked in some way before they can be used with Sage? Yes. > Will there be some sort of automatic installation of

[sage-devel] Re: 'report bug' link on sagemath.org?

On May 18, 5:21 am, Harald Schilly wrote: > On May 18, 11:40 am, Franco Saliola wrote: > > > Perhaps we should add a 'report bug' link on sagemath.org? > > in the notebook, top right, is the "report a problem" link and it > would be easy to include it in the header of sagemath.org, too. > prob

[sage-devel] Re: graph construction

Since no one seemed to have dealt with this: This is now #6066 so the patch doesn't get lost. Cheers, Michael --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr.

[sage-devel] Re: libfplll 3.0.12 fails on Solaris (SPARC) with Sage 4.0.alpha0

On May 17, 1:34 pm, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote: > I'm not sure if you expected this to fail, but it compiled ok on my > Solaris 10 update 6 SPARC until here: Yes, it was mentioned as a problem in the 4.0.a0 release notes. I have a fix that will be in 4.0.rc0. Cheers, Michael --~--~-~--

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0.alpha0 released!

On May 17, 11:33 am, J Elaych wrote: > Ubuntu 9.04 64bit amd xp2 builds fine.  The -optional and - > experimental package list > is the same as always so I'm wondering if that is going to be upgraded > to the latest > scipy Scipy is in Sage, so it won't show up in the optional or experimental

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0.alpha0 released!

On May 17, 3:29 am, Carlo Hamalainen wrote: > On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 4:55 PM, mabshoff wrote: > > As usual please build, doctest and report any issues. Hi Carlo, > On 32bit x86 Ubuntu 9.04: > > The following tests failed: > >         sage -t  "devel/s

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.4.2 released (and this time it is the final one)

On May 17, 1:39 am, "Serge A. Salamanka" wrote: > It would be good to update sage-announce Google Group due to the new > release. There is still information about 3.3 release. > > #Serge Yeah, I know. It is on my list to do, but I have been working non-stop on 4.0 for the last couple weeks, so

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0.alpha0 released!

On May 16, 10:00 pm, Minh Nguyen wrote: > On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 4:53 PM, John H Palmieri > wrote: > > > > > > > On May 16, 7:55 am, mabshoff wrote: > >> Hello folks, > > >> I did not believe it would happen before the official start of SD

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0.alpha0 released!

On May 16, 3:01 pm, John Cremona wrote: > 2009/5/16 mabshoff : > > > > > On May 16, 1:54 pm, John Cremona wrote: > >> 2009/5/16 Jaap Spies : > > > > > >> I get the same as Jaap on my 32-bit ubuntu. > > ... whereas on 64-bit ubuntu: &g

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0.alpha0 released!

On May 16, 1:54 pm, John Cremona wrote: > 2009/5/16 Jaap Spies : > I get the same as Jaap on my 32-bit ubuntu. Ok, I am waiting on all my builds to finish before opening ticket, but someone feel free to open two ticktets; (a) numerical noise (b) maxima command completion results needs to

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0.alpha0 released!

On May 16, 10:37 am, Gonzalo Tornaria wrote: > On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 1:53 PM, John H Palmieri > wrote: > > > Cloning doesn't seem to work because of a non-ASCII character in > > mpolynomialsystem.py. Patch up at Sorry, I normally do the clone test before releasing, but I was wau too tired

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0.alpha0 released!

On May 16, 9:00 am, Jason Grout wrote: > mabshoff wrote: > > >  * ecl causes about two bugs and a half on OSX and probably some other > > systems. __repr__ seems to cause sync issues, there is some problem > > with numerical noise and the list of Maxima commands see

[sage-devel] Sage 4.0.alpha0 released!

-long "devel/sage/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ ell_generic.py" sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/symbolic/expression.pyx" I should open ticker in the next couple hours when I have some downtime during the SD15 talks. I have put sage.math, 32 and 64 bit MacIntel, the sources

[sage-devel] Re: Sage and the Free Software Foundation.

On May 16, 2:41 am, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > On May 16, 2009, at 2:25 AM, ahmet alper parker wrote: > Of course, philosophical discussions on the merit of GNU/the GPL   > belong on sage-flame, to try and keep sage-devel about more   > development related stuff. +1 - maybe we need a sage-gpl

[sage-devel] Re: Help with licensing a spkg?

On May 16, 2:30 am, simon.k...@uni-jena.de wrote: > Hi Michael, > > On 15 Mai, 09:52, mabshoff wrote: > > > I am not sure I understand the question, but there is no need to > > provide a diff or anything like that. It is sufficient just to put the > > modified fil

[sage-devel] Request for review: get coverage of the quadratic forms code to 100%

It would be nice if someone with an interest in qf would review #5954 and #6040. It gets the code up to 100% and improves various bits :) Cheers, Michael --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from thi

[sage-devel] Re: Sage, Mathematica and Solaris

On May 15, 1:57 am, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote: Hi Dave, > This might interest some. > > http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica/brows... > > where someone is questioning the commitment of Wolfram Research towards > Solaris. There are currently no replies to it, but it w

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0 plan

On May 15, 2:47 am, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > On May 14, 2009, at 11:28 PM, mabshoff wrote: > > Info like this should not go into trac, but on a wiki page. If you > > want to see what has changed between revisions on the wiki it is > > tedious at best. I obviously mea

[sage-devel] Re: Help with licensing a spkg?

On May 15, 12:35 am, simon.k...@uni-jena.de wrote: > Hi Michael, > > On May 15, 9:07 am, mabshoff wrote: > > > Your modifications must be GPL Compatible, i.e. either the GPL itself > > or something like a 2 clause BSD. > > Sure, but this was my question: *H

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0.a0 status update

On May 14, 11:51 pm, "Nicolas M. Thiery" wrote: > On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 10:40:26PM -0700, mabshoff wrote: > Note that I did not choose to go for Symmetrica in the first place! > In MuPAD-Combinat, I already had done the work of replacing it > whenever possible b

[sage-devel] Re: Help with licensing a spkg?

On May 15, 12:00 am, Simon King wrote: > Hi all! > > For my p-group cohomology spkg, I use some third party code. It is an > old version of C-MeatAxe that we use for historic reasons; the code is > shortened and extensively modified. > > As much as I understand, C-MeatAxe is under GPL. But I do

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0 plan

On May 14, 2:00 pm, David Roe wrote: > I've taken a look at most of these.  I'll send Nicolas comments off list > (though I probably won't get to that until later tonight).  But I agree with > Robert that a global picture wiki page would be good. > David Please keep review comments on list or

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0 plan

On May 14, 3:41 pm, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > On May 14, 2009, at 2:02 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote: > > I am trying to keep the patch description on trac up-to-date (from the > > description in the patch itself): > > >    http://sagetrac.org/sage_trac/ticket/5891 > > > Suggestions for improve

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0.a0 status update

On May 14, 1:18 pm, "Nicolas M. Thiery" wrote: > On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 08:34:56PM +0100, Martin Albrecht wrote: Hi, > > >  * Solaris: I finally *fixed* the symmetrica issues and all it took > > > was 6 hours of staring at disgusting code. > > > Congratulations! Thanks. > And thanks so muc

[sage-devel] Re: graph construction

On May 14, 8:01 pm, Rado wrote: Hi Rado, > here is the patch as promised. I don't have a trac account and it > seems closed, so someone needs to paste it there. Follow http://wiki.sagemath.org/TracGuidelines and I will take care of your account. > http://www.math.uiuc.edu/~rkirov2/sage/1180

[sage-devel] Re: sage patches to ghmm

the email interface. > (because of this kind of problem, I do think that everyone should run > their high-traffic mailing lists without any sort of reply-to munging, > like the Linux folks do) > > On May 6, 9:46 pm, mabshoff wrote: > > > > Since they haven't released in sev

[sage-devel] (most) Sage 3.4.2 binaries posted

Hello folks, most 3.4.2 binaries are up on sagemath.org and being mirrored out. >From the usual suspects some are still missing, i.e. * Fedora Core 10 32 bit * Atom * RHEL 5.2/SLES 10 Itanium * OSX 10.4 Intel Most of the missing binaries will show up in the next 24 hours. We also have some

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0.a0 status update

On May 14, 9:46 am, Craig Citro wrote: > > I don't think they would rename "sum" to please us! > > And I really really don't think they should. After all, the issue is > that python and pari both use the same name for something -- we might > as well be asking python to rename their sum funct

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0.a0 status update

On May 14, 4:31 am, mabshoff wrote: > Ok, *still* no alpha (I caught up with sleep yesterday-ish), but here > we go: > >  * 75% coverage: Still at 74.4%, but pynac will get us over 75%. > >  * pynac: Number of failing doctests keesp decreasing - I am not > keeping track

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0.a0 status update

Ok, *still* no alpha (I caught up with sleep yesterday-ish), but here we go: * 75% coverage: Still at 74.4%, but pynac will get us over 75%. * pynac: Number of failing doctests keesp decreasing - I am not keeping track of this, so somebody else has to update on this * 64 bit OSX: does now pa

[sage-devel] Re: graph construction

On May 14, 1:32 am, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > On May 14, 2009, at 1:18 AM, Rado wrote: > > > Last question if I used ./sage -clone myvrr and made the changes in > > myver, how do I tell sage to run the tests there (if this even makes > > sense?) > > You can do > > ./sage -t devel/sage-myvrr/sage

[sage-devel] Re: graph construction

On May 14, 1:08 am, Rado wrote: > The bug is almost trivial. The code > > verts = data.keys() > > for u in data: >    verts.union([v for v in data[u] if v not in verts]) > > is slowing down because in python searching in lists is slow. If we > use "verts = set(data.keys())" the code speeds

[sage-devel] Re: Using --enable-framework on Mac OS X?

On May 14, 12:42 am, Brian Granger wrote: > > As is Sage doesn't even build if you do a straight up framework build. > > This can and will be fixed, but if I have learned one thing about > > FrameWorks on OSX is to avoid them whenever possible, i.e that > > absolute crap issue with the IOKit an

[sage-devel] Re: Using --enable-framework on Mac OS X?

On May 13, 9:46 am, Brian Granger wrote: Hi Brian, > I just pinged the pythonmac-sig group about why and when a framework > build is actually needed.  A while back I created an spkg for qt/pyqt > and I remember that I needed to do a framework build to get it to > work.  My recollection is tha

[sage-devel] Re: 3.4.2 64 bit MacIntel 10.5 binary with only *one* doctest failure

On May 13, 2:37 pm, mark mcclure wrote: > On May 12, 3:27 am, mabshoff wrote: Hi, > > I have build a 3.4.2 binary with various fixes and posted it at > >    http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mabshoff/OSX64/ > > Please give it a spin if you care about 64 bit OSX. &g

[sage-devel] Re: C library for SCSCP

On May 13, 5:25 am, Mickael Gastineau wrote: Hi Mickael, > The fedora says that isn't compatible but the FSF says that it is > compatible with GPL : > seehttp://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/  (section CeCILL version > 2) > orhttp://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#SoftwareLicenses No,

[sage-devel] Re: C library for SCSCP

On May 13, 1:42 am, Mickael Gastineau wrote: > Dear all, Hi Mickael, > You may have heard about the protocol called "Symbolic Computation > Software Composability Protocol", abbreviated SCSCP, developped under > the SCIEnce project (http://www.symbolic-computation.org/). > > I have made a C l

[sage-devel] name of wiki pages

Hi, this isn't against David, it just annoys me to no end that people do this: This has come up before, but I consider it *completely useless* when someone opens a page named http://wiki.sagemath.org/extra%20documentation%20%28for%20the%20standard%20components%20of%20SAGE%29 since no one can

[sage-devel] Re: 3.4.2 64 bit MacIntel 10.5 binary with only *one* doctest failure

On May 12, 10:37 am, William Stein wrote: > 2009/5/12 mabshoff : > I can resolve the failure in gen.pyx easily: Just completely delete > the finitefield_init function!     Well, nuking functionality is always a solution ;) >  This pari function has always been > flakie, IM

[sage-devel] 3.4.2 64 bit MacIntel 10.5 binary with only *one* doctest failure

/home/mabshoff/OSX64/ The md5sum is ceecabe47a054674ea578449261aabcb sage-3.4.2-OSX10.5-64bit-i386- Darwin.dmg It still has a single workaround applied to make the notebook work, but we should be able to resolve that and the doctest failure in gen.pyx in the remaining time for Sage 4.0. All

[sage-devel] Sage 4.0.a0 status update

Ok, no 4.0.a0 yet, but it should drop fairly soon. An update of what is going on: * 75% coverage - we are already close at 74.4% or so and the pynac symbolics switch will get us past 75%. There is also a bunch of code in trac that should increase coverage even further. Depending on what else is

[sage-devel] Re: sage -upgrade 3.4.2

On May 11, 4:48 am, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > Are the sources not in the right spots yet? Nope, but they are available at http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mabshoff/release-cycles-3.4.2/sage-3.4.2/ > - Robert Cheers, Michael --~--~-~--~~~---~--~--

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0 show stopper issue: Maxima+ecl vs. CTRL-C

On May 10, 8:48 am, mabshoff wrote: > So two possibilities: > >  * Someone figures out how to make the ecl signal handler work. For the record: Gonzalo fixed it in a clever way without needing to send nasty CTRL-C, so in the end we also cleaned up some other doctest failure. Once

[sage-devel] Re: Using --enable-framework on Mac OS X?

On May 10, 10:36 am, Prabhu Ramachandran wrote: > On 05/10/09 21:58, mabshoff wrote: Hi Prabhu, > Well, I have seen this when I got the error first time (google is our > friend) but didn't believe the answer would work for the simple reason > that VTK is really well tested.

[sage-devel] Re: Using --enable-framework on Mac OS X?

On May 10, 9:19 am, Prabhu Ramachandran wrote: > On 05/10/09 21:03, mabshoff wrote: Hi Prabhu, > > I don't understand why VTK needs Python to be a framework. Googling > > around for 5 minutes did not reveal anything useful. Can you give me > > some pointers an

[sage-devel] Sage 4.0 show stopper issue: Maxima+ecl vs. CTRL-C

Hi, I did most of the work of packaging ecl for Sage and have run into a serious problem: The assumptions code in Sage needs to be able to interrupt the question Maxima's assumption system asks. It does that by sending a CTRL-C. It worked more or less with clisp (I can trace a variety of problems

[sage-devel] Re: webdriver - test framework for websites

On May 9, 2:56 am, Harald Schilly wrote: Hi, > this tests websites (i.e. our notebook) and could be useful. it is > nearer to the OS than selenium, which is just js > based.http://google-opensource.blogspot.com/2009/05/introducing-webdriver.htmlhttp://code.google.com/p/webdriver/ This looks

[sage-devel] Re: Using --enable-framework on Mac OS X?

On May 10, 5:01 am, Prabhu Ramachandran wrote: > Hi, Hi Prabhu, > I had a mini-vacation and I spent a while trying to get sage working > with VTK on a Macbook.  The machine is somewhat slow and experimenting > takes a long while.  I've managed to get VTK built with Sage but > required a framewo

[sage-devel] Re: Symbolics and Sage 4.0

On May 7, 5:04 pm, Jason Grout wrote: > William Stein wrote: > > wst...@sage:~$ ginsh > > ginsh - GiNaC Interactive Shell (ginac V1.4.1) > > ... > >> sqrt(2)^2; > > 2 > > > I've added this to the wiki. > > It might be useful, if possible, to make sage -ginsh launch ginsh, or > something simi

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0 plan

One more thing: I have updated http://wiki.sagemath.org/plan/sage-4.0 in the wiki with most of the info here, but it might be a good idea to (a) keep it current as things develop (b) add all missing info about projects, i.e. who is working on coverage, etc (c) clean it up in general Signing o

[sage-devel] Re: Symbolics and Sage 4.0

On May 7, 7:16 am, Jaap Spies wrote: > Mike Hansen wrote: > > Hi Mike > ImportError: libpynac-0.1.so.2: cannot open shared object file: No such file > or directory > Error importing ipy_profile_sage - perhaps you should run %upgrade? > WARNING: Loading of ipy_profile_sage failed. > > What's

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.4.2 released (and this time it is the final one)

On May 7, 6:41 am, Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote: > Hi Michael, Hi Golam, > On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 3:37 AM, mabshoff wrote: > > > All the bits are in the usual place in > > >  http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mabshoff/release-cycles-3.4.2/ > > I am wondering wh

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0 plan

I spend some time tonight on the gcc 4.4.0 porting problem and there is only little work left to be done: I had resolved all issues in Sage 3.1.2, but neglected to merge all the fixed into subsequent releases. Issues from 3.1.2 (3.4.2): * gmp (gone in MPIR) * ntl (Fixed in ntl-5.4.2.p7.spkg, n

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0 plan

On May 7, 12:55 am, davidloeffler wrote: > Can I use this opportunity to request some reviews for modular forms > patches? I decided I'd spend a few afternoons squashing as many easy > modular forms buglets as I could, with the result that there is now a > bunch of tickets that are "[with patch

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0 plan

On May 7, 1:11 am, Martin Albrecht wrote: > > Mon May 11:  fix fallout;        malb fix os x libsingular (?) > > > Tue May 12:  sage-4.0.rc1.tar > > > Wed May 13: > > > Thu May 14:  sage-4.0.final.tar > > > Fri May 15:  Release sage-4.0.tar. > > Well, my plan was to update Singular to 3.1 and P

[sage-devel] Re: Clarification of Sage and GPL

On May 6, 5:43 pm, Ivan Andrus wrote: > On May 6, 2009, at 12:09 AM, mabshoff wrote: > > > Note that any GPLed codebase like Singular or pari would also be viral > > to high level code and I cannot believe that this is the way the GPL > > is intended. Anything usin

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.0 plan

On May 6, 5:53 pm, William Stein wrote: > Hi, > > This is the plan for getting Sage-4.0 out.  Help in any way you can. > > Wed May 6: * mhansen (by 2am) -- patches/todo list so anybody can help. >            * robertwb will have reviewed david roe's >            * m

[sage-devel] Re: sage patches to ghmm

On May 6, 2:16 pm, Tim Abbott wrote: > Hello, Hi Tim, > The ghmm developers have posted a 0.9rc1 release candidate on their > website: > > Good. > with the hopes of doing an actual release shortly (they said they were > doing it

[sage-devel] Re: New machine in the sage.math network

On May 6, 1:21 am, Peter Jeremy wrote: > On 2009-May-04 19:26:13 -0700, William Stein wrote: > > >Unfortunately, it seems that this does *NOT* mean that if you write a > >little C program, spawn 128 threads, and watch them run, then you can > >do 128 times what you would do with 1 thread.  You

[sage-devel] Re: Singular 3-1-0?

On May 6, 2:32 am, simon.k...@uni-jena.de wrote: > Hi Michael, Hi Simon, > So, what Sage release, approximately? Well, given that Sage 3.4.2 is just out and that SD15 starts in 10 days I would say the next one. > > What does the docstring say? Is it supposed to work? This might be a > > bug

[sage-devel] Re: strange rounding with SymbolicArithmetic

On May 6, 2:35 am, Yann wrote: > It's trac #5942 Ok, it looked familiar. I have CCed Carl Witty on the ticket so he is aware of its existence, not that this implies that he has to fix it. Cheers, Michael --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email

[sage-devel] Re: strange rounding with SymbolicArithmetic

On May 6, 2:20 am, Yann wrote: > Just for the record, > isn't the following a bug? It looks like one to me. > sage: p=RealIntervalField(4)(3.1) > sage: p.str(style='brackets') > '[3.00 .. 3.25]' > sage: p > 4.? The printing is a little odd, I would expect it to print 3.? cwitty? Cheers, Mi

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >