Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage-10.4 fails to build

On Fri, Aug 02, 2024 at 09:40:03AM -0700, Matthias Koeppe wrote: > According to your log, this is a build failure using the experimental > option "./configure --enable-system-site-packages". > > This failure comes from use of system NumPy 2; try with > https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/38227

[sage-devel] Re: Sage-10.4 fails to build

According to your log, this is a build failure using the experimental option "./configure --enable-system-site-packages". This failure comes from use of system NumPy 2; try with https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/38227, which has a fix. On Friday, August 2, 2024 at 2:49:31 AM UTC-7 Niranjana

[sage-devel] Re: sage optional packages

On Sunday, July 28, 2024 at 11:02:32 PM UTC-7 Kwankyu Lee wrote: On Sunday, July 28, 2024 at 11:11:03 PM UTC+9 Matthias Koeppe wrote: All these packages are tested automatically on all supported platforms on GH Actions, on every beta release. See for example https://github.com/sagemath/sage/act

[sage-devel] Re: sage optional packages

Isn't there a subtle difference between `ptestlong` and `ptestalllong` ? Le lundi 29 juillet 2024 à 08:02:32 UTC+2, Kwankyu Lee a écrit : > On Sunday, July 28, 2024 at 11:11:03 PM UTC+9 Matthias Koeppe wrote: > > Hi William, > > On Friday, July 26, 2024 at 5:35:29 AM UTC+1 William Stein wrote: >

[sage-devel] Re: sage optional packages

On Sunday, July 28, 2024 at 11:11:03 PM UTC+9 Matthias Koeppe wrote: Hi William, On Friday, July 26, 2024 at 5:35:29 AM UTC+1 William Stein wrote: I'm curious about the testing and installation support for the optional packages listed on the SageMath documentation page here

[sage-devel] Re: sage optional packages

Hi William, On Friday, July 26, 2024 at 5:35:29 AM UTC+1 William Stein wrote: I'm curious about the testing and installation support for the optional packages listed on the SageMath documentation page here . All these packages

[sage-devel] Re: sage optional packages

FWIW I'm regularly testing with a few optional packages but no comprehensive tests: packages=[ '4ti2', 'benzene', 'beautifulsoup4', 'biopython', 'database_cremona_ellcurve', 'database_jones_numfield', 'da

[sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.4.rc1 released

On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 6:00 PM Matthias Köppe wrote: > > https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/38201 is waiting for review. yes, this works as a fix for #38190 Although the whole purpose of sagemath_environment is unclear to me. It was promoted to optional in https://github.com/sagemath/sage/p

[sage-devel] Re: Sage build from source problems

I had not run ". ./.homebrew-build-env"; it is working now. Thanks a lot, Matthias! On Wednesday 17 January 2024 at 21:24:55 UTC-5 Matthias Koeppe wrote: > From sageliblog: > >gcc -bundle -undefined dynamic_lookup > -L/Users/aashrayajha/GitHub/Sage/sage/local/lib > -Wl,-rpath,/Users/

[sage-devel] Re: Sage build from source problems

>From sageliblog: gcc -bundle -undefined dynamic_lookup -L/Users/aashrayajha/GitHub/Sage/sage/local/lib -Wl,-rpath,/Users/aashrayajha/GitHub/Sage/sage/local/lib -L/Users/aashrayajha/GitHub/Sage/sage/local/lib -Wl,-rpath,/Users/aashrayajha/GitHub/Sage/sage/local/lib -Wl,-rpath,/Users/a

[sage-devel] Re: sage-10.2.rc4 does not build on opensuse tumbleweed

Installation of the system package readline-devel solved the problem. Now sage-10.1 and sage-10.2.rc4 compile and run on my tumbleweed without problems. Maybe, this package is contained in the "standard" tumbleweed configuration but not in the "minimal" one. It is strange though that it used to

[sage-devel] Re: sage-10.2.rc4 does not build on opensuse tumbleweed

Our CI tests with the official opensuse/tumbleweed Docker image, see https://github.com/sagemath/sage/blob/develop/tox.ini#L381 I think it's updated daily. On Monday, November 20, 2023 at 2:39:54 PM UTC-8 Christian Bär wrote: > How recent is the tumbleweed install you are testing against? As >

[sage-devel] Re: sage-10.2.rc4 does not build on opensuse tumbleweed

How recent is the tumbleweed install you are testing against? As mentioned, sage-10.1 initially did compile until some tumbleweed update broke it, leading to the error message described above. This is why I am skeptical that installing more system packages will resolve the problem. Matthias Ko

[sage-devel] Re: sage-10.2.rc4 does not build on opensuse tumbleweed

For reference, this is https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/27750#issuecomment-1432504494 (the easy fix somehow never made it into Sage) It will go away in our upgrade to FLINT 3, https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35848, which does not have these problematic LD_LIBRARY_PATH manipulation

[sage-devel] Re: sage-10.2.rc4 does not build on opensuse tumbleweed

We also see this failure on opensuse-tumbleweed in our CI in the "minimal" system package configuration https://github.com/sagemath/sage/actions/runs/6909825582/job/18801882455#step:11:2323 However, the "standard" system package configuration builds and tests fine: https://github.com/sagemath/

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 9.5 won't launch nor install (any version ? ) on debian testing/sid and ubuntu 23.10

Hi, In case it might help for the Ubuntu install, you may take a look at this page: https://sagemanifolds.obspm.fr/install_ubuntu.html Best wishes, Eric. Le mardi 7 novembre 2023 à 13:00:55 UTC+1, Laurent Bakri a écrit : > Hi all, > > I am using Debian Testing (now "Sid" because I was wonde

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage CI Failing in SymPy GitHub Actions

On Saturday, November 4, 2023 at 5:17:01 AM UTC-7 Oscar Benjamin wrote: On Sun, 24 Sept 2023 at 22:10, Oscar Benjamin wrote: > So if there are doctest updates needed I guess the workflow is: > > - Open a PR against sagemath/sage with the needed (doctest or other) changes > - Make SymPy's Sa

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage CI Failing in SymPy GitHub Actions

On Sun, 24 Sept 2023 at 22:10, Oscar Benjamin wrote: > > > On Sunday, September 24, 2023 at 11:46:05 AM UTC-7 Oscar Benjamin wrote: > > > >> Where would I send the PR for the Sage doctests? > > On Sun, 24 Sept 2023 at 20:48, Matthias Koeppe > wrote: > > > > I've added this to ci-sage.yml to expl

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage CI Failing in SymPy GitHub Actions

On Monday, September 25, 2023 at 4:55:01 AM UTC-7 Oscar Benjamin wrote: > So currently the SymPy Sage CI job points at: > https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36276 That is a PR against the sagemath/sage develop branch. Should any new PR with doctest updates be based off of that PR and set

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage CI Failing in SymPy GitHub Actions

On Sun, 24 Sept 2023 at 22:43, Matthias Koeppe wrote: > > On Sunday, September 24, 2023 at 2:10:26 PM UTC-7 Oscar Benjamin wrote: > > > On Sunday, September 24, 2023 at 11:46:05 AM UTC-7 Oscar Benjamin wrote: > > > >> Where would I send the PR for the Sage doctests? > > On Sun, 24 Sept 2023 at 20:

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage CI Failing in SymPy GitHub Actions

On Sunday, September 24, 2023 at 2:10:26 PM UTC-7 Oscar Benjamin wrote: > On Sunday, September 24, 2023 at 11:46:05 AM UTC-7 Oscar Benjamin wrote: > >> Where would I send the PR for the Sage doctests? On Sun, 24 Sept 2023 at 20:48, Matthias Koeppe wrote: > > I've added this to ci-sage.yml

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage CI Failing in SymPy GitHub Actions

> On Sunday, September 24, 2023 at 11:46:05 AM UTC-7 Oscar Benjamin wrote: > >> Where would I send the PR for the Sage doctests? On Sun, 24 Sept 2023 at 20:48, Matthias Koeppe wrote: > > I've added this to ci-sage.yml to explain what to do: > > # To test with a Sage PR, use this: > #s

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage CI Failing in SymPy GitHub Actions

On Sunday, September 24, 2023 at 11:46:05 AM UTC-7 Oscar Benjamin wrote: On Sun, 24 Sept 2023 at 18:47, Matthias Koeppe wrote: > PR https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/25728 updates the workflow. Apologies for not submitting this fix earlier. > PRs updating the Sage doctests for changes in Sy

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage CI Failing in SymPy GitHub Actions

On Sun, 24 Sept 2023 at 18:47, Matthias Koeppe wrote: > > PR https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/25728 updates the workflow. Apologies > for not submitting this fix earlier. > PRs updating the Sage doctests for changes in SymPy are very welcome. Thanks Matthias. Where would I send the PR for th

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage CI Failing in SymPy GitHub Actions

PR https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/25728 updates the workflow. Apologies for not submitting this fix earlier. PRs updating the Sage doctests for changes in SymPy are very welcome. On Sunday, September 24, 2023 at 4:23:38 AM UTC-7 Oscar Benjamin wrote: > On Sun, 24 Sept 2023 at 09:50, Dima

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage CI Failing in SymPy GitHub Actions

it seems that there are many old versions of this ci-sage.yml floating aroung on the net, see e.g. https://github.com/pypa/setuptools/blob/main/.github/workflows/ci-sage.yml I've opened https://github.com/pypa/setuptools/issues/4057 On Sun, Sep 24, 2023 at 12:43 PM Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > OK, s

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage CI Failing in SymPy GitHub Actions

OK, sorry, as usual for me I mixed up sympy and scipy :-) yes, trac tickes became github PRs. On Sun, 24 Sept 2023, 12:23 Oscar Benjamin, wrote: > On Sun, 24 Sept 2023 at 09:50, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > > > On Sun, Sep 24, 2023 at 9:21 AM Tirthankar Mazumder > > wrote: > > > > > > Sorry to

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage CI Failing in SymPy GitHub Actions

On Sun, 24 Sept 2023 at 09:50, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 24, 2023 at 9:21 AM Tirthankar Mazumder > wrote: > > > > Sorry to resurrect such an old thread, but the Sage CI is failing for SymPy > > again. This time, it looks to me like the issue is the fact that GitHub > > Actions is tr

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage CI Failing in SymPy GitHub Actions

On Sun, Sep 24, 2023 at 9:21 AM Tirthankar Mazumder wrote: > > Sorry to resurrect such an old thread, but the Sage CI is failing for SymPy > again. This time, it looks to me like the issue is the fact that GitHub > Actions is trying to pull the Sage code from trac, which shouldn't be > happenin

[sage-devel] Re: Sage CI Failing in SymPy GitHub Actions

Sorry to resurrect such an old thread, but the Sage CI is failing for SymPy again. This time, it looks to me like the issue is the fact that GitHub Actions is trying to pull the Sage code from trac, which shouldn't be happening because SageMath moved to GitHub some time back. Can somebody pleas

[sage-devel] Re: sage-10

ubuntu version mantic 23.10 But at least I have no more the problem of running an ipynb which failed because not finding the link to a file which is still  not working with sage-9.5 the ubuntu version ! Le 22/05/2023 à 13:36, Henri Girard a écrit : Hi, Last version rcxx was compiled witho

[sage-devel] Re: Sage developer's guide

Hi, Here is the preliminary version of new developer guide (no 's): https://deploy-preview-35460--sagemath-tobias.netlify.app Errors, typos, defects should go to: https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35460 Thanks for your attention in advance. On Wednesday, April 5, 2023 at 2:33:44 PM UTC+9

[sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc2 released

Hi, https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35571 is trivial to review, and will prevent Sage to ship a dangerous version of the openssl standard package to the users for the next release. Some of the "High severity" vulnerabilities can be exploited on the clients by malicious servers. There is no

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

Hey All! Please let me know I am included within the accepted organization or not? According to Karachi, Pakistan timezone last night was my GSoC'23 result. Please guide me through the procedure how to check my GSoC'23 result. Name :- Sumaiya Qureshi (Karachi, Pakistan) I opted for Improvement

[sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

Hi, Le Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 10:43:35AM +0100, Dima Pasechnik a écrit : > Thanks, it's now https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35571 Could this straightforward ticket be set to blocker and reviewed for the next official release ? Ciao, Thierry > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 10:32 AM Thierry >

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Thu, 2023-04-27 at 12:37 -0700, Matthias Koeppe wrote: > A problem only arises when you try to build a bleeding-edge sage on an older > stable distro -- an undertaking unsupported by most projects. > > Is it? I would say that Sage is very special in this regard because of its > extreme number

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 3:59:22 AM UTC-7 Michael Orlitzky wrote: On 2023-04-26 19:59:01, Matthias Koeppe wrote: > Just as a data point, eliminating the spkg and only supporting system PARI > 2.15.x would have the effect to eliminate support of: > - all versions of Ubuntu except for 23.0

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Thu, 2023-04-27 at 08:38 -0700, Nils Bruin wrote: > > But another problem before was that the different packages would not > develop in lockstep. Some components might need one specific version of > prerequisites and others another. So one could run into genuine version > conflicts. In theo

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Thursday, 27 April 2023 at 03:59:22 UTC-7 Michael Orlitzky wrote: It's not the end of the world if users on a distro with old dependencies have to stick to an older version of sage. Ideally, they would be getting sage from their distro in the first place. A problem only arises when you try t

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On 2023-04-26 19:59:01, Matthias Koeppe wrote: > On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 7:37:17 PM UTC-7 Michael Orlitzky wrote: > > Just as a data point, eliminating the spkg and only supporting system PARI > 2.15.x would have the effect to eliminate support of: > - all versions of Ubuntu except for 23

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 8:40:08 PM UTC-7 William Stein wrote: On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 7:59 PM Matthias Koeppe wrote: Just as a data point, eliminating the spkg and only supporting system PARI 2.15.x would have the effect to eliminate support of: - all versions of Ubuntu except for 23.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 7:59 PM Matthias Koeppe wrote: > On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 7:37:17 PM UTC-7 Michael Orlitzky wrote: > > On 2023-04-26 18:38:32, Matthias Koeppe wrote: > > Michael, do you happen to have a suggestion what version range of PARI > the > > Sage library should be supporti

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 7:37:17 PM UTC-7 Michael Orlitzky wrote: On 2023-04-26 18:38:32, Matthias Koeppe wrote: > Michael, do you happen to have a suggestion what version range of PARI the > Sage library should be supporting? PARI doesn't strictly follow semver, so whatever I say here

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On 2023-04-26 18:38:32, Matthias Koeppe wrote: > Michael, do you happen to have a suggestion what version range of PARI the > Sage library should be supporting? PARI doesn't strictly follow semver, so whatever I say here, PARI will eventually make a fool of me. Still, I think a fair goal is to su

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

Michael, do you happen to have a suggestion what version range of PARI the Sage library should be supporting? On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 4:18:29 PM UTC-7 Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On Wed, 2023-04-26 at 13:06 -0700, Matthias Koeppe wrote: > > > > 2. I'm not in favor of chipping away 1 packa

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

I've reposted this last message in a separate thread. On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 5:05:56 PM UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote: > Thanks, John. But I think it's more productive to ask: > **What was/is/will be the *purpose* of maintaining the Sage distribution?** > (Historically; as of today; and lo

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

Thanks, John. But I think it's more productive to ask: **What was/is/will be the *purpose* of maintaining the Sage distribution?** (Historically; as of today; and looking forward by a year or two.) Here are some of my thoughts on this question: 1. Ease of installation. Historically, an important

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Wed, 2023-04-26 at 13:06 -0700, Matthias Koeppe wrote: > > 2. I'm not in favor of chipping away 1 package at a time in the name > of unsubstantiated, vague notions that a package is "ballast slowing > down Sage's progress". > There's a ticket open to update PARI within Sage. First, upstream h

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

In an attempt to make this less of a religious war and more akin to something like a rational discussion: - The status quo is that we include Python3 and gcc. If you want to argue for their removal, you need to provide evidence that this will not cause problems for people on supported platforms

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 1:46:41 PM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote: On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 9:06 PM Matthias Koeppe wrote: > 2. I'm not in favor of chipping away 1 package at a time in the name of unsubstantiated, vague notions that a package is "ballast slowing down Sage's progress". It

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 1:46:41 PM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote: we can barely keep up with security updates for e.g. openssl. It took Thierry to provide a patch today, and me converting it into a PR, else we probably would be still shipping openssl version with severe CVEs. You know as

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 1:46:41 PM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote: On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 9:06 PM Matthias Koeppe wrote: > My 2023 summary of the situation: > > 1. I would be in favor of abandoning the Sage distribution (despite the fact that I have certainly put a lot of time and energ

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 9:06 PM Matthias Koeppe wrote: > > On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 12:33:13 PM UTC-7 William Stein wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 12:27 PM David Roe wrote: > > I do think it would be valuable for other people on this list to offer some > > thoughts on whether Sage sho

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

Dima, The word "G..v..d...e" is the worst curse in the Dutch language. The first three letters needs no translation. The rest translates to 'damn'. You shouldn't use it lightly. Jaap Op wo 26 apr. 2023 21:20 schreef Dima Pasechnik : > On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 8:18 PM Matthias Koeppe > wrote: >

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 12:33:13 PM UTC-7 William Stein wrote: On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 12:27 PM David Roe wrote: > I do think it would be valuable for other people on this list to offer some thoughts on whether Sage should prioritize reducing the number of foundational packages we offe

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 12:27 PM David Roe wrote: > > I'm sorry to have prompted another flame war, but please keep the tone polite > Dima and Matthias. I know that you're both frustrated at this issue being > unresolved, but it's not appropriate to have a fight like this that goes to > 2570 d

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

I'm sorry to have prompted another flame war, but please keep the tone polite Dima and Matthias. I know that you're both frustrated at this issue being unresolved, but it's not appropriate to have a fight like this that goes to 2570 different people's inboxes, with frequent emails sniping at each

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

Hi Everybody, Just a reminder of https://github.com/sagemath/sage/blob/develop/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md In particular, 1. Be friendly and patient. 2. Be welcoming. 3. Be considerate. 4. Be respectful and polite. As a community, we've agreed that these are very reasonable ways to conduct ourselves on

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 8:18 PM Matthias Koeppe wrote: > > On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 12:14:26 PM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > This discussion happened 2 years ago > > > That's correct, and you have not brought forward any new points. Godverdomme, this was about GFORTRAN!!! WE ARE TAKLKIN

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 12:14:26 PM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote: This discussion happened 2 years ago That's correct, and you have not brought forward any new points. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

And Mattias, ffs, we are talking about removing *Python*, and you cite a thread on removing *gfortran*. This is a very bad way of conducting a discussion, and it is not the 1st time you do this sort of thing. Please stop. On Wed, 26 Apr 2023, 20:10 Matthias Koeppe, wrote: > On Wednesday, April

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

This is ludicrous. This discussion happened 2 years ago, and I really think if anyone needs a hand-built Python, they can please themselves with building it. But on macOS in particular the Python supplied by python.org has been doing fine, for years. On Wed, 26 Apr 2023, 20:10 Matthias Koeppe,

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 10:40:27 AM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote: We should remove python3 spkg, and gcc spkg too, for the same reason. It's a ballast slowing down Sage's progress. This is an unsubstantiated claim that you keep repeating. The last substantial discussion of this proposal h

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Wed, 26 Apr 2023, 20:03 Matthias Koeppe, wrote: > On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 10:25:37 AM UTC-7 David Roe wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 6:41 AM Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > PS. I think openssl spkg should just be removed from Sage, it serves > no purpose as far as I can tell. > > > For

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 10:25:37 AM UTC-7 David Roe wrote: On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 6:41 AM Dima Pasechnik wrote: PS. I think openssl spkg should just be removed from Sage, it serves no purpose as far as I can tell. For a long time it was very important for getting a functional Sage on

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 10:40 AM Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > For a long time it was very important for getting a functional Sage on > > MacOS; is that no longer the case? > Sorry, I don't understand. > > Noone I know builds Python (the only package that needs openssl) from source. > For a long tim

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 6:25 PM David Roe wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 6:41 AM Dima Pasechnik wrote: >> >> PS. I think openssl spkg should just be removed from Sage, it serves >> no purpose as far as I can tell. > > > For a long time it was very important for getting a functional Sage o

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 6:41 AM Dima Pasechnik wrote: > PS. I think openssl spkg should just be removed from Sage, it serves > no purpose as far as I can tell. > For a long time it was very important for getting a functional Sage on MacOS; is that no longer the case? David > > On Wed, Apr 26,

[sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

PS. I think openssl spkg should just be removed from Sage, it serves no purpose as far as I can tell. On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 10:32 AM Thierry wrote: > > Hi, > > Sage's current openssl version (3.0.5) hass several "High severity" > vulnerabilities, see https://www.openssl.org/news/vulnerabilities

[sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

Thanks, it's now https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35571 On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 10:32 AM Thierry wrote: > > Hi, > > Sage's current openssl version (3.0.5) hass several "High severity" > vulnerabilities, see https://www.openssl.org/news/vulnerabilities.html > > It would be nice to have the fi

[sage-devel] Re: [sage-release] Sage 10.0.rc0 released

Hi, Sage's current openssl version (3.0.5) hass several "High severity" vulnerabilities, see https://www.openssl.org/news/vulnerabilities.html It would be nice to have the fixes included in the next Sage release. I am not using github, here is a pull request (literally) to fix this : git pull

[sage-devel] Re: Sage developer's guide

This PR is ready for review, now! Kwankyu Lee schrieb am Mittwoch, 5. April 2023 um 10:28:22 UTC+2: It seems like that banner could be updated a bit, now that it is April. I do realize that there's still a lot being hashed out about the exact workflow... It seems that the workflow is still i

[sage-devel] Re: Sage developer's guide

I created a PR https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35460 to start. Please help if you want to get things done fast. On Wednesday, April 5, 2023 at 2:33:44 PM UTC+9 William Stein wrote: > Hi Sage Developers, > > Somebody was asking me about doing Sage development, and I pointed > them to the

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage developer's guide

Anyone should be able to be a reviewer, but not everyone a PR-approving reviewer. The problem is that approving a PR is something that should not be left to arbitrary people. I.e. not every reviewer, potentially requesting changes and approving changes, should be able to approve the PR. So the la

[sage-devel] Re: Sage developer's guide

(6) What to do with automatic labelling vs manual labelling? https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35172 If any organization member can be a reviewer, automatic labelling should be implemented, since only triage team members can add labels. But I think the current manual labelling should not

[sage-devel] Re: Sage developer's guide

It seems like that banner could be updated a bit, now that it is April. I do realize that there's still a lot being hashed out about the exact workflow... It seems that the workflow is still in flux. Some questions: (1) Who can be a reviewer? Anyone, organization member or members of triage

[sage-devel] Re: [sage-combinat-devel] implementing covering arrays

Thanks David. Our initial patch does not change the OA code at all. I think once we get a fully featured CA code, we can propose a transition of the OA code to a method at that time. On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 12:19:56 PM UTC-5 David Joyner wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 12:11 PM bre

[sage-devel] Re: [sage-combinat-devel] implementing covering arrays

On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 12:11 PM brett stevens wrote: > We have completed our initial implementation of covering arrays with basic > methods. It is ready for review and we are looking for reviewers. The > pull request is here: > > https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35008 > > Againi, I'm cc'in

[sage-devel] Re: Sage GSoC2023 Ideas Page

Thank you for organizing this! On Monday, 6 February 2023 at 06:07:04 UTC+1 Travis Scrimshaw wrote: > Hi everyone, >I know things are a bit hectic with the transition right now. However, > the deadline for submitting our GSoC proposal is tomorrow (at least for > me). I would appreciate it i

[sage-devel] Re: Sage GSoC2023 Ideas Page

Hi everyone, I know things are a bit hectic with the transition right now. However, the deadline for submitting our GSoC proposal is tomorrow (at least for me). I would appreciate it if you could add a project (you don't have to agree to be a mentor) or let me know if you are willing to mento

[sage-devel] Re: Sage GSoC2023 Ideas Page

Hi Martin, I think that would be a good project. I can put in a quick sketch on the ideas page. It doesn't need to be anything fully thought out (that is really for the applicant to do in some sense). Thanks, Travis On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 6:17:30 PM UTC+9 axio...@yahoo.de wrote:

[sage-devel] Re: Sage GSoC2023 Ideas Page

I would be interested in continuing our work on combinatorial species, but I am away until the 6th of February, and it is not clear to me whether it would make a good project. What do you think? Are improvements to existing code welcome? Martin On Tuesday, 31 January 2023 at 03:42:48 UTC+1 T

[sage-devel] Re: Sage seems to be broken on Gitpod workspaces

I've opened https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/34623 for this On Saturday, October 1, 2022 at 1:30:10 AM UTC-7 seb@gmail.com wrote: > Hi, > > at least since 9.8.beta1 I get: > > (base) gitpod@sagemath-sagetracmirror-bkjzz4skuj7:/workspace/sagetrac-mirror$ > sage > bash: sage: command not found

[sage-devel] Re: sage zoom meeting reminder

Sorry I cannot make it this time (I am in the train). But next Thursday should be OK. Best wishes, Eric. Le jeudi 15 septembre 2022 à 16:54:32 UTC+2, wst...@gmail.com a écrit : > Reminder -- that 30 minute Sage zoom meeting thing that Matthias > organized is happening in a few minutes from ri

[sage-devel] Re: [sage-support] Sagetex version ?

This is best discussed on the actual ticket - https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/32887 On Saturday, August 20, 2022 at 8:52:30 AM UTC-7 emanuel.c...@gmail.com wrote: > Le samedi 20 août 2022 à 17:45:44 UTC+2, dim...@gmail.com a écrit : > >> we cannot agree on the direction for sagetex. >> >> Ma

[sage-devel] Re: [sage-support] Sagetex version ?

Le samedi 20 août 2022 à 17:45:44 UTC+2, dim...@gmail.com a écrit : > we cannot agree on the direction for sagetex. > > Matthias insists on conversation of it to a proper Python package, > without a build dependency on make or ninja. I disagree - I spent time > converting it to a Python packa

[sage-devel] Re: [sage-support] Sagetex version ?

we cannot agree on the direction for sagetex. Matthias insists on conversation of it to a proper Python package, without a build dependency on make or ninja. I disagree - I spent time converting it to a Python package which uses ninja at build time - and in fact ninja IS available as Python pack

[sage-devel] Re: sage error 9.6 I got this errors and I don't know how to fix them

See also this guide to install SageMath in Ubuntu: https://sagemanifolds.obspm.fr/install_ubuntu.html -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+u

[sage-devel] Re: sage error 9.6 I got this errors and I don't know how to fix them

It seems you are trying to build from source. Suggestion: run the following ``` make configure ./configure ``` and carefully read and apply the suggestions at the end of the output of ./configure. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group.

[sage-devel] Re: sage error 9.6 I got this errors and I don't know how to fix them

[image: Screenshot from 2022-07-26 15-54-39.png] El lunes, 25 de julio de 2022 a las 3:17:35 UTC-5, Rey David Gutiérrez Torres escribió: > [image: Screenshot from 2022-07-24 23-23-15.png] > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To uns

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage 9.7 Doctest/Install Error Sage9.6 Crash Report

I just verified that the bug reported in trac #33212 does not arise with the current prerelease of the binary SageMath 9.7 app, which is based on 9.7.beta5. This is consistent with the trac report since the app is built with XCode 13.3.1. Note that the binary app will work on older versions of

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage 9.7 Doctest/Install Error Sage9.6 Crash Report

Thanks. This test error is known, it's a specific to M1 Apple CPUs bug in gf2e external package used by Sage. See https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/33212 On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 4:28 AM Yueqi Li wrote: > > Thank you so much for your help! After using ./sage -t > --optional='sage,optional,!sage.mi

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage 9.7 Doctest/Install Error Sage9.6 Crash Report

Thank you so much for your help! After using ./sage -t --optional='sage,optional,!sage.misc.cython' --all, I only had two error: ** File "src/sage/modules/vector_rational_dense.pyx", line 112, in sage.modules.vector_rational_den

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage 9.7 Doctest/Install Error Sage9.6 Crash Report

You can also suppress these particular doctests (which test the runtime use of the compilers) using ./sage -t --optional='sage,optional,!sage.misc.cython' --all (see https://trac.sagemath.org/wiki/ReleaseTours/sage-9.7#Modularizationchanges) On Monday, July 18, 2022 at 10:18:25 AM UTC-7 Matthias

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage 9.7 Doctest/Install Error Sage9.6 Crash Report

These are not the same errors. The linker complains about mpfr not being found. This happens on macOS when you run the doctester (sage -t) from a shell where you didn't run "source ./.homebrew-build-env" On Monday, July 18, 2022 at 1:21:33 AM UTC-7 nicole...@gmail.com wrote: > > I tried rebuild

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage 9.7 Doctest/Install Error Sage9.6 Crash Report

This needs to be done in a shell prepared for building Sage -- don't forget "source ./.homebrew-build-env" On Sunday, July 17, 2022 at 11:16:42 PM UTC-7 nicole...@gmail.com wrote: > It raise errors when i run it. > > On Monday, July 18, 2022 at 1:56:38 AM UTC-4 Matthias Koeppe wrote: > >> Try "m

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage 9.7 Doctest/Install Error Sage9.6 Crash Report

It raise errors when i run it. On Monday, July 18, 2022 at 1:56:38 AM UTC-4 Matthias Koeppe wrote: > Try "make primecountpy-clean primecountpy" > > On Sunday, July 17, 2022 at 10:39:50 PM UTC-7 nicole...@gmail.com wrote: > >> Thank you for your advice, I tried to reinstall python3 from Homebrew,

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage 9.7 Doctest/Install Error Sage9.6 Crash Report

Try "make primecountpy-clean primecountpy" On Sunday, July 17, 2022 at 10:39:50 PM UTC-7 nicole...@gmail.com wrote: > Thank you for your advice, I tried to reinstall python3 from Homebrew, but > it still doesn't work. After I reinstall/upgrade python 3 and gsl from > Homebrew, my working direct

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage 9.7 Doctest/Install Error Sage9.6 Crash Report

Thank you for your advice, I tried to reinstall python3 from Homebrew, but it still doesn't work. After I reinstall/upgrade python 3 and gsl from Homebrew, my working directory sage 9.6 crashed. My laptop is MacBook Pro with M1 chip with MacOS Big Sur version11.4. Thanks for any suggestion and h

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage 9.7 Doctest/Install Error

I recommend that you do as recommended in the output of ./configure, and install python3 from Homebrew On Sun, 17 Jul 2022, 08:59 Yueqi Li, wrote: > Dear Prof. Koeppe, > > Thank you so much for your help! After I run "brew install gsl," I was > not able to run any doctes. Then I try to run ./co

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >