Re: [sage-devel] Re: Cygwin(64) port status

On Tuesday, January 6, 2015 4:02:45 PM UTC+1, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, January 6, 2015 3:51:29 PM UTC+1, John Cremona wrote: >> >> By the way, there is discussion of building Pari under Cygwin 64 on >> the pari-dev list; bugs are being discovered and fixed as I type. >> >>

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Cygwin(64) port status

On Tuesday, January 6, 2015 3:51:29 PM UTC+1, John Cremona wrote: > > By the way, there is discussion of building Pari under Cygwin 64 on > the pari-dev list; bugs are being discovered and fixed as I type. > > Great news! My last findings were that PARI behaved very badly on Cygwin64. For exam

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Cygwin(64) port status

By the way, there is discussion of building Pari under Cygwin 64 on the pari-dev list; bugs are being discovered and fixed as I type. John On 27 November 2014 at 17:39, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote: > And I forgot http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17365 and > http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15649 whic

[sage-devel] Re: Cygwin(64) port status

Thanks to Travis, only the ATLAS patch needs review! http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17365 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

[sage-devel] Re: Cygwin(64) port status

Bumpy bump. http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17365 http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15649

[sage-devel] Re: Cygwin(64) port status

We've included dev releases before into Sage, and having closer to out-of-the-box support for Cygwin64 gets a +1 from me. Best, Travis PS - I should have some time to look again at Cygwin stuff soon. On Thursday, December 11, 2014 6:37:33 AM UTC-8, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote: > > > > On Thursday,

[sage-devel] Re: Cygwin(64) port status

On Thursday, November 27, 2014 6:39:13 PM UTC+1, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote: > > And I forgot http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17365 and > http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15649 which need a little love (and as it > only affects Cygwin should be easy to review, at least if you trust me)!!! > In add

[sage-devel] Re: Cygwin(64) port status

And I forgot http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17365 and http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15649 which need a little love (and as it only affects Cygwin should be easy to review, at least if you trust me)!!! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel"

[sage-devel] Re: Cygwin(64) port status

On Tuesday, November 25, 2014 10:46:56 PM UTC+1, mmarco wrote: > > The result of the compilation is relocatable? I mean, would it be > eventually possible to have something that windows users just unzip and > runs? Or would they always need to compile it? > I would say so, i dont really know if

[sage-devel] Re: Cygwin(64) port status

The result of the compilation is relocatable? I mean, would it be eventually possible to have something that windows users just unzip and runs? Or would they always need to compile it? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscri