On Dec 11, 10:17 am, mabshoff wrote:
> On Dec 11, 10:14 am, daveloeffler wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
> > I'm having trouble building the reference manual. Looks like this is
> > because there is an "r" missing in sage.calculus.calculus.py, so the
> > docstring for the minpoly function is encoded wron
On Dec 11, 10:57 am, daveloeffler wrote:
> I'm also getting problems with the docstrings in sage/misc/hg.py --
> the docstrings look fine at first glance, but the parser produces
>
> \begin{itemize}
> ...
> \begin{verbatim}
> ...
> \end{itemize}
> ...
> \end{verbatim}
>
> and latex doesn't like t
On Dec 11, 2008, at 10:17 AM, mabshoff wrote:
>
> On Dec 11, 10:14 am, daveloeffler wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
>> I'm having trouble building the reference manual. Looks like this is
>> because there is an "r" missing in sage.calculus.calculus.py, so the
>> docstring for the minpoly function is enco
I'm also getting problems with the docstrings in sage/misc/hg.py --
the docstrings look fine at first glance, but the parser produces
\begin{itemize}
...
\begin{verbatim}
...
\end{itemize}
...
\end{verbatim}
and latex doesn't like that (quite understandably). I have no idea how
to fix this.
Dav
On Dec 11, 10:14 am, daveloeffler wrote:
Hi David,
> I'm having trouble building the reference manual. Looks like this is
> because there is an "r" missing in sage.calculus.calculus.py, so the
> docstring for the minpoly function is encoded wrongly, and latex2html
> sees "\var{epsilon}" and rai
I'm having trouble building the reference manual. Looks like this is
because there is an "r" missing in sage.calculus.calculus.py, so the
docstring for the minpoly function is encoded wrongly, and latex2html
sees "\var{epsilon}" and raises an invalid character error on "\v".
Seems a bit pointless
On Dec 11, 9:50 am, "John Cremona" wrote:
> All well on 32-bit Suse except for this, which looks similar to but
> not identical to Jaap's. On second thoughts (after pasting it in) it
> does look the same as Jaap's, now that the lines wrap differently.
>
> sage -t "devel/sage/sage/rings/polyno
All well on 32-bit Suse except for this, which looks similar to but
not identical to Jaap's. On second thoughts (after pasting it in) it
does look the same as Jaap's, now that the lines wrap differently.
sage -t "devel/sage/sage/rings/polynomial/multi_polynomial_ideal.py"
**
On Dec 11, 4:54 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 10, 2:48 pm, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > mabshoff wrote:
> > > Hello folks,
>
> Hi Jaap,
>
> > > here goes 3.2.2.alpha1, somewhat later than I had hoped. We have about
> > > a week left in the development cycle, so
On Dec 11, 12:26 pm, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You likely have two heads, i.e. you need to do a merge. That is why it
> is highly recommended to upgrade from a clean branch. "hg heads"
> should tell you if you have more than one head and "hg merge tip"
> should get you all the change
On Dec 10, 2:48 pm, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> mabshoff wrote:
> > Hello folks,
Hi Jaap,
> > here goes 3.2.2.alpha1, somewhat later than I had hoped. We have about
> > a week left in the development cycle, so stay tuned for more alphas.
> > There are a couple must have tickets lef
On Dec 11, 3:57 am, "David Joyner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi David,
> On amd64 ubuntu 8.10, build went fine. This time the tests did not hang
> but all was not quite perfect. I got two of these:
>
> *** *** Error: TIMED OUT! PROCESS KILLED! *** ***
> *** *** Error: TIMED OUT! *** ***
>
> One
On Dec 11, 4:22 am, daveloeffler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi David,
> Wait a minute, there is actually something funny going on. The upgrade
> process hasn't actually upgraded as it should have: the changes to
> file matrix2.pyx that I made as part of #4681, which was merged in
> this alpha, h
Wait a minute, there is actually something funny going on. The upgrade
process hasn't actually upgraded as it should have: the changes to
file matrix2.pyx that I made as part of #4681, which was merged in
this alpha, haven't actually appeared. Even more strangely, if I do
"sage -hg changes" on tha
On my laptop (32-bit Pentium M running SuSE), upgrading from
3.2.2.alpha0, it builds without complaining. I am running sage -
testall -long at the moment, and so far there are two failures:
- the one from sage/misc/cachefunc.py which happened last time, with
source introspection not working for c
On amd64 ubuntu 8.10, build went fine. This time the tests did not hang
but all was not quite perfect. I got two of these:
*** *** Error: TIMED OUT! PROCESS KILLED! *** ***
*** *** Error: TIMED OUT! *** ***
One was for sage -t "devel/sage/sage/calculus/wester.py"
and the other forsag
mabshoff wrote:
>
> [quote]
> Version 3.9 --- Version 3.10
>
> As usual, when a new version is released, there are some new and
> improved algorithms, and many new programs have been incorporated into
> simcalc. The basic structure of SIMATH has remained essentially
> unchanged.
>
> The GN
On Dec 11, 2:22 am, "John Cremona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/12/11 mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Cool. William was definitely exited about that patch and I am sure he
> > is happy to review it, too. He mentioned that this is the first open
> > source implementation of that algorit
2008/12/11 mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> On Dec 11, 1:57 am, "John Cremona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
>> All well via upgrade from 3.2.1 and all tests pass on Suse 64-bit.
>
> Yep, I did some build testing and all tests passed for me on 7
> different machines, so it looks like
On Dec 11, 1:57 am, "John Cremona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi John,
> All well via upgrade from 3.2.1 and all tests pass on Suse 64-bit.
Yep, I did some build testing and all tests passed for me on 7
different machines, so it looks like so far we have very little to
worry about.
> Built fin
All well via upgrade from 3.2.1 and all tests pass on Suse 64-bit.
Built fine, tests still running on ubuntu 32-bit. (I put my laptop to
sleep and went to bed forgetting that the -tastall was still running.
When I woke it up this morning it just carried on from where it left
off, with only a 9 h
On Dec 10, 2:48 pm, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> mabshoff wrote:
> > Hello folks,
Hi Jaap,
> > here goes 3.2.2.alpha1, somewhat later than I had hoped. We have about
> > a week left in the development cycle, so stay tuned for more alphas.
> > There are a couple must have tickets lef
On Dec 10, 2008, at 09:54 , mabshoff wrote:
>
> Hello folks,
>
> here goes 3.2.2.alpha1, somewhat later than I had hoped. We have about
> a week left in the development cycle, so stay tuned for more alphas.
> There are a couple must have tickets left for 3.2.2 that are not yet
> merged, two of w
Jaap Spies wrote:
> mabshoff wrote:
>> Hello folks,
>>
>> here goes 3.2.2.alpha1, somewhat later than I had hoped. We have about
>> a week left in the development cycle, so stay tuned for more alphas.
>> There are a couple must have tickets left for 3.2.2 that are not yet
>> merged, two of which a
mabshoff wrote:
> Hello folks,
>
> here goes 3.2.2.alpha1, somewhat later than I had hoped. We have about
> a week left in the development cycle, so stay tuned for more alphas.
> There are a couple must have tickets left for 3.2.2 that are not yet
> merged, two of which are
From Fedora 9, 32 bi
25 matches
Mail list logo
