Hello, this is a reminder that currently 3 blocker tickets need review.
All of them have some discussion, but they all seem stalled:
* Set JUPYTER_CONFIG_DIR
https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21430
* Old installed version of Cython is used
https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21441
* CoinBackend: _
On 04/24/2013 04:52 PM, Martin Raum wrote:
Implementing a workaround
for all OS's then is essentially equivalent to skipping part of the
test
I don't agree with this statement. The test is about the functioning of
pexpect, not about OS-specific timings. It's not the job of Sage to test
the oper
I must say that I saw the ticket and was about to review it, because nobody
had done this so far. But I read Volker's comment, and I agree with him.
Perhaps the reason for the failure of all of us to review this ticket is
that not only Volker feels uncomfortable with such a change.
I don't know
I don't think there is a bad consequence for repeatedly checking the status
of a terminated child process with exponential backoff. Its just really
weird that you would ever do that if your OS works correctly. And IMHO it
hurts code maintainability. Not to mention debugging, assuming that you ar
On 04/24/2013 02:37 PM, Volker Braun wrote:
For the record, I disagree with the approach to both #14371 and #14460
in that fugly workarounds to fundamental bugs in Solaris or a particular
gcc version are applied liberally to, basically, everyone. Sure,
sometimes it is necessary to work around bug
For the record, I disagree with the approach to both #14371 and #14460 in
that fugly workarounds to fundamental bugs in Solaris or a particular gcc
version are applied liberally to, basically, everyone. Sure, sometimes it
is necessary to work around bugs, but that should be a special case and no
*ping*
This sage-5.9 blocker still needs review:
#14371: Race condition in singular doctest
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/14371
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails
This still needs review:
#14371: Race condition in singular doctest
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/14371
And also the GCC-4.8.0 work-around would be good to merge in sage-5.9
(but not a blocker):
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/14460
--
You received this message because
Hi,
Tickt 14433 fails on my system:
sage:len(search_doc('tree', interact=False).splitlines()
3956
sage: version()
'Sage Version 5.8, Release Date: 2013-03-15'
bg,
Johannes
On 12.04.2013 16:01, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> There are 2 blocker tickets remaining for Sage 5.9, both of them need
> review:
There are 2 blocker tickets remaining for Sage 5.9, both of them need
review:
#14371: Race condition in singular doctest
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/14371
#14426: Runaway/Segfaulting ECL processes
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/14426
There is already 1 blocker for Sag
On 05/ 4/11 08:50 AM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
On 2011-05-03 21:44, Volker Braun wrote:
I agree that sage-4.7 should compile with gcc-4.6.[01]. But why not
specifically excluding these two instead of an wildcard?
What if gcc 4.6.2 exhibits the same bug? I think the *safer* option is
to assume th
On 2011-05-03 21:44, Volker Braun wrote:
> I agree that sage-4.7 should compile with gcc-4.6.[01]. But why not
> specifically excluding these two instead of an wildcard?
I did this for cliquer because that gcc bug should be fixed, see #11227.
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@
The *safest* option of them all is of course to never build with
optimizations. Its comparably easy to generate straightforward machine code,
the compiler bugs are invariably tied to the optimization process. Also, I
think that old bugs in the gcc bugzilla are not systematically tested
against
On 2011-05-03 21:44, Volker Braun wrote:
> I agree that sage-4.7 should compile with gcc-4.6.[01]. But why not
> specifically excluding these two instead of an wildcard?
What if gcc 4.6.2 exhibits the same bug? I think the *safer* option is
to assume the status-quo that the bug will not be fixed.
I agree that sage-4.7 should compile with gcc-4.6.[01]. But why not
specifically excluding these two instead of an wildcard?
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more o
On 2011-05-03 17:23, Volker Braun wrote:
> I have a bad feeling about this. We both know that nobody is going to
> check whether its still necessary to downgrade optimizations by the time
> that, say, 4.6.5 rolls out.
Those bugs have been reported upstream to gcc, so if they get fixed, I
will get n
I have a bad feeling about this. We both know that nobody is going to check
whether its still necessary to downgrade optimizations by the time that,
say, 4.6.5 rolls out. IHMO it would be much better to use the compiler
wrapper and limit optimizations globally for specific compiler releases.
--
On 2011-05-03 15:43, Volker Braun wrote:
> Wait just because there may be a bug in 4.6.0 we disable optimizations
> for future gcc versions that may fix these?
If these future gcc versions are released, we can change the spkgs
accordingly. At least a pre-release version of gcc 4.6.1 still contain
Wait just because there may be a bug in 4.6.0 we disable optimizations for
future gcc versions that may fix these?
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, v
On 2011-05-03 14:34, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> There are two blockers for sage-4.7 which need review, both are spkg
> patches:
>
> #11226: Sympow spkg fails with gcc 4.6.0
>
> #11278: singular 3-1-1-4.p8 fails on Mac OS X 10.4
Two more blocker tickets needing review, where a check for gcc version
There are two blockers for sage-4.7 which need review, both are spkg
patches:
#11226: Sympow spkg fails with gcc 4.6.0
#11278: singular 3-1-1-4.p8 fails on Mac OS X 10.4
Normally, these two tickets are the last obstacles for a sage-4.7 release.
Jeroen.
--
To post to this group, send an email
21 matches
Mail list logo
