On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 7:29 PM, Justin C. Walker wrote:
>
>
> On Jun 18, 2009, at 10:26 , Craig Citro wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Here's rc3, which *should* be the last rc for this release cycle. I've
>> tested it on my laptop and the build farm, and I've had no troubles at
>> all, and it's curr
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 6:43 PM, Nick Alexander wrote:
>
>
> On 22-Jun-09, at 9:38 AM, Robert Miller wrote:
>
>>
>> I tried running the Sage notebook as follows, from SAGE_ROOT/devel/
>> sage-main:
>>
>> $ ../../sage -notebook
>>
>> And I get the following error:
>>
>> Please wait while the Sage N
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6385
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http:
On Jun 18, 2009, at 10:26 , Craig Citro wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Here's rc3, which *should* be the last rc for this release cycle. I've
> tested it on my laptop and the build farm, and I've had no troubles at
> all, and it's currently going on a few other machines, so hopefully
> that'll turn out
2009/6/22 Nick Alexander :
>
>
> On 22-Jun-09, at 9:38 AM, Robert Miller wrote:
>
>>
>> I tried running the Sage notebook as follows, from SAGE_ROOT/devel/
>> sage-main:
>>
>> $ ../../sage -notebook
>>
>> And I get the following error:
>>
>> Please wait while the Sage Notebook server starts...
>>
On 22-Jun-09, at 9:38 AM, Robert Miller wrote:
>
> I tried running the Sage notebook as follows, from SAGE_ROOT/devel/
> sage-main:
>
> $ ../../sage -notebook
>
> And I get the following error:
>
> Please wait while the Sage Notebook server starts...
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File
PS - I'm on a MacBook running OS 10.5.7, and
sage: notebook()
works fine.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more optio
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Robert Miller wrote:
>
> I tried running the Sage notebook as follows, from SAGE_ROOT/devel/
> sage-main:
>
> $ ../../sage -notebook
>
> And I get the following error:
>
> Please wait while the Sage Notebook server starts...
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>
Sage works on slax-linux-6.2 (slackware Linux).
By the ways, I will distribute a live DVD/cdrom Linux in ICMCT9,
http://www.ictmt9.org. In which, Sage-4.0.1 is contained with other
CAS, octave, Maxima, Axiom and others. In particular, Sage worked with
Maxima-5.18.1.
The introduction of Live Linux
Hi Craig,
On 21 Jun., 23:32, Craig Citro wrote:
> Hi Georg,
>
> > The root cause was the patch for trac #2513 which was incorporated in
> > Sage-4.0.2.alpha4, concerning the setting (or not ...) of the variable
> > LANG in the sage-env script.
>
> > I'll prepare a nice patch with some explanatio
The spkg also works on a Fedora 11, x86_64 box.
regards
john perry
On Jun 20, 11:13 am, Andrzej Giniewicz wrote:
> Final update on my Arch Linux current try - with #6362 "all tests passed"!
>
> On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Andrzej Giniewicz wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> > small update - build finishe
Hi Georg,
> The root cause was the patch for trac #2513 which was incorporated in
> Sage-4.0.2.alpha4, concerning the setting (or not ...) of the variable
> LANG in the sage-env script.
>
> I'll prepare a nice patch with some explanations for the R.spkg's
> "spkg-install" script to use 'LANG="en_
On 19 Jun., 08:28, gsw wrote:
> > I checked back for the my Sage-4.0.1 Intel Mac OS X 10.4 build and
> > unfortunately yes, this problem is there, too --- so the currently
> > bdist'ed version is flawed :-/
> > I don't seem to have my Sage-4.0 logs anymore, but I found those for
> > Sage-3.4.2,
2009/6/20 Craig Citro :
>
>>> Interesting ... that means that the call to sys.exit(0) is generating
>>> an exception that's getting caught in the except: clause. Can you file
>>> a ticket for this? I'll happily review it. :)
>>
>> I created a ticket #6364, without a patch though since it's outside
>> Interesting ... that means that the call to sys.exit(0) is generating
>> an exception that's getting caught in the except: clause. Can you file
>> a ticket for this? I'll happily review it. :)
>
> I created a ticket #6364, without a patch though since it's outside
> SAGE_ROOT/devel.
>
Actually
Final update on my Arch Linux current try - with #6362 "all tests passed"!
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Andrzej Giniewicz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> small update - build finished, "make test" running - posted ticket
> about it the issue (with better explanation) with spkg attached for
> review - #6362
2009/6/20 Craig Citro :
>
>> That did the trick -- ran fine and no "failure" line at the end. (I
>> moved that line to the end as suggested)
>>
>
> Interesting ... that means that the call to sys.exit(0) is generating
> an exception that's getting caught in the except: clause. Can you file
> a ti
Hi,
small update - build finished, "make test" running - posted ticket
about it the issue (with better explanation) with spkg attached for
review - #6362
cheers,
Andrzej
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 2:42 AM, Andrzej Giniewicz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> nice to have a new release!
>
> I tried to build but didn
Compiled fine on OSX.4 G4 PPC.
There were a lot of warnings in Sphinx at the very end about duplicate
references within the English tutorial, usually with bibliography.rst.
- kcrisman
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups
Hi,
nice to have a new release!
I tried to build but didn't get far, GCC 4.4 here (actually gcc
version 4.4.0 20090526 prerelease that fixes other problem with build
I had with sage 4.0). Anyway - had to patch libsingular (it use
deprecated strchr form in 2 places, simple cast is enough to fix i
> That did the trick -- ran fine and no "failure" line at the end. (I
> moved that line to the end as suggested)
>
Interesting ... that means that the call to sys.exit(0) is generating
an exception that's getting caught in the except: clause. Can you file
a ticket for this? I'll happily review i
It's a small point but the title of
#6193: John Cremona: implement elliptic logarithm
is nto really accurate since we already had the elliptic log, but the
implementation has been improved. Therefore it's not exactly a "new
feature". (there will be a related new feature soon, namely
"implement c
2009/6/19 Craig Citro :
>
>> All seemed well with that test (all etsts passed, etc), but the final
>> lines of output are
>>
>> All tests passed! Popping patches from queue ...
>> cd "/home/jec/sage-4.0.2/devel/sage" && hg qpop -a
>> cd "/home/jec/sage-4.0.2/devel/sage" && hg qdelete trac_5307.pat
2009/6/19 Craig Citro :
>
>>> Similar error with any other sage -merge command. Am I doing
>>> something wrong?
>>
>> I think I had this problem based on the current directory. Could you
>> try in a different directory? (I think this is a sage-wide problem
>> but I can't say with certainty.)
>>
Hi folks,
Here is a release note for Sage 4.0.2. I'm sending this only to
sage-release and sage-devel. The announcement on sage-announce will be
forthcoming when binaries are in order, and a release tour is ready.
Sage 4.0.2 was released on June 18th, 2009. It is available at
http://
>> Similar error with any other sage -merge command. Am I doing
>> something wrong?
>
> I think I had this problem based on the current directory. Could you
> try in a different directory? (I think this is a sage-wide problem
> but I can't say with certainty.)
>
Yep, I remember Nick saying som
> All seemed well with that test (all etsts passed, etc), but the final
> lines of output are
>
> All tests passed! Popping patches from queue ...
> cd "/home/jec/sage-4.0.2/devel/sage" && hg qpop -a
> cd "/home/jec/sage-4.0.2/devel/sage" && hg qdelete trac_5307.patch
> Building failed with System
2009/6/19 Nick Alexander :
>
>> I wanted to try out this feature. Here is what happened. I built
>> 4.0.2.rc3 from scratch, made a clone called test, cd'd into
>> devel/sage-test, initialised MQ by "sage -hg qinit". And then:
>>
>> j...@host-57-89%sage -merge -c
>> Traceback (most recent call l
> I wanted to try out this feature. Here is what happened. I built
> 4.0.2.rc3 from scratch, made a clone called test, cd'd into
> devel/sage-test, initialised MQ by "sage -hg qinit". And then:
>
> j...@host-57-89%sage -merge -c
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "/home/jec/sage-curre
SSSE3 is only available on Intel machines and the VIA Nano, so I don't
think that is what you mean.
I'm sure we can get fairly robust binaries which don't make
assumptions about SSE availability, without too much difficulty.
It would help a lot if anyone did have problems with the last Sage x86
2009/6/18 Craig Citro :
>
> Hi all,
>
> Here's rc3, which *should* be the last rc for this release cycle. I've
> tested it on my laptop and the build farm, and I've had no troubles at
> all, and it's currently going on a few other machines, so hopefully
> that'll turn out fine, too. Please test it
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 1:13 PM, gsw wrote:
>
>
>
> On 19 Jun., 08:50, Craig Citro wrote:
>> > Yes, the parallel build code was reworked for 4.0.1. Not sure why
>> > we're seeing this, but still.
>>
>> Well, the parallel build code in 4.0.1 *should* be contained to the
>> sage build itself (it'
On 19 Jun., 08:50, Craig Citro wrote:
> > Yes, the parallel build code was reworked for 4.0.1. Not sure why
> > we're seeing this, but still.
>
> Well, the parallel build code in 4.0.1 *should* be contained to the
> sage build itself (it's in sage's setup.py, and it's a separate
> builder that
> Yes, the parallel build code was reworked for 4.0.1. Not sure why
> we're seeing this, but still.
>
Well, the parallel build code in 4.0.1 *should* be contained to the
sage build itself (it's in sage's setup.py, and it's a separate
builder that one has to instantiate). I won't say it's impossi
On 18-Jun-09, at 11:28 PM, gsw wrote:
>
>
>
> On 19 Jun., 08:21, gsw wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> r/rpy does not build reliably for me anymore using " export
>> MAKE='make
>> -j2' " on my MacIntel Core2Duo / Mac OS X 10.4.11. I reported this
>> already for Sage-4.0.2.rc0 (in a one-message thread :-) )
On 19 Jun., 08:21, gsw wrote:
> Hi,
>
> r/rpy does not build reliably for me anymore using " export MAKE='make
> -j2' " on my MacIntel Core2Duo / Mac OS X 10.4.11. I reported this
> already for Sage-4.0.2.rc0 (in a one-message thread :-) ) thinking
> that it would be sporadic, but it seems to h
Hi,
r/rpy does not build reliably for me anymore using " export MAKE='make
-j2' " on my MacIntel Core2Duo / Mac OS X 10.4.11. I reported this
already for Sage-4.0.2.rc0 (in a one-message thread :-) ) thinking
that it would be sporadic, but it seems to hit always now: I built
Sage-4.0.2.rc2 and Sa
> All tests passed on 64-bit Ubuntu 9.04 and 32-bit Fedora 10. All tests
> passed on bsd.math, except that #6242 is still a problem; the
> birds_other.rst doctests segfault between a quarter and a third of the
> time.
>
Yep, this is a known issue. This is the same as #6304, which David
Harvey had
All tests passed on 64-bit Ubuntu 9.04 and 32-bit Fedora 10. All tests
passed on bsd.math, except that #6242 is still a problem; the
birds_other.rst doctests segfault between a quarter and a third of the
time.
Dan
--
--- Dan Drake
- KAIST Department of Mathematical Sciences
--- http:
compiled fine and all tests passed on amd64 ubuntu 9.04.
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Craig Citro wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Here's rc3, which *should* be the last rc for this release cycle. I've
> tested it on my laptop and the build farm, and I've had no troubles at
> all, and it's currently
All tests passed on a fresh build on ubuntu 32-bit (took no longer
than usual: 3099s).
Same on 64-bit (<3000s).
John
2009/6/18 Marshall Hampton :
>
> All tests passed on an intel mac pro running 10.4.11.
>
> The tests took 6975 seconds, which seems like a big increase from
> 3.0.2 (4818 seconds
All tests passed on an intel mac pro running 10.4.11.
The tests took 6975 seconds, which seems like a big increase from
3.0.2 (4818 seconds) and 3.4 (5358 seconds). Is this simply because
of the additional doctests, or are there serious speed regressions
somewhere? I recall some discussion abou
Jaap Spies wrote:
> Craig Citro wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Here's rc3, which *should* be the last rc for this release cycle. I've
>> tested it on my laptop and the build farm, and I've had no troubles at
>> all, and it's currently going on a few other machines, so hopefully
>> that'll turn out fine,
On Jun 18, 12:17 pm, Jaap Spies wrote:
> Craig Citro wrote:
> > Hi all,
>
> > Here's rc3, which *should* be the last rc for this release cycle. I've
> > tested it on my laptop and the build farm, and I've had no troubles at
> > all, and it's currently going on a few other machines, so hopefully
>
Craig Citro wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Here's rc3, which *should* be the last rc for this release cycle. I've
> tested it on my laptop and the build farm, and I've had no troubles at
> all, and it's currently going on a few other machines, so hopefully
> that'll turn out fine, too. Please test it and l
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 3:26 AM, Craig Citro wrote:
>
> I believe that the necessary upgrade bits are sitting here, but I
> haven't tried it:
>
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/craigcitro/release/sage-4.0.2.rc3/
Upgraded from sage-4.0.2.rc3 OK on sage.math. But soon after executing
the
> Curiously enough, I think you will need very little hand-holding.
> (But I'm willing to answer whatever questions I can.) Hopefully you
> won't have a whole lot of spkgs to update, and merging new code is
> very easy with Craig's apply_ticket.py program. (Check ~ncalexan/bin
> for an hg reposi
2009/6/17 William Stein :
>
> 2009/6/17 eduardo :
>>
>> hi all
>> on o a debian linux, 64 bits i got this failure
>
> This happens if you have the optional cremona database installed. It's
> a known problem (I reported it to trac yesterday).
And very soon afterwards a patch was delivered fixing t
On 17-Jun-09, at 4:55 PM, Tom Boothby wrote:
> Alright, I'll do a release -- I'm going to need some serious
> hand-holding though.
Curiously enough, I think you will need very little hand-holding.
(But I'm willing to answer whatever questions I can.) Hopefully you
won't have a whole lot o
Alright, I'll do a release -- I'm going to need some serious
hand-holding though.
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 4:05 PM, William Stein wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:54 PM, Tom Boothby wrote:
>>
>> Is it too late to include #6307 into 4.0.2? This is very sensitive to
>> bitrot, because it split
Tom Boothby wrote:
> Alright, I'll do a release -- I'm going to need some serious
> hand-holding though.
Yeah! And a huge +1 to the ideas behind 6307. There have been at least
two times in the last little while that I've started to mess with the
javascript (to debug the tinymce issue and to
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:54 PM, Tom Boothby wrote:
>
> Is it too late to include #6307 into 4.0.2? This is very sensitive to
> bitrot, because it splits the notebook javascript into a few separate
> files.
No further code goes into 4.0.2 except critical bugfixes needed to
make that release (wh
Is it too late to include #6307 into 4.0.2? This is very sensitive to
bitrot, because it splits the notebook javascript into a few separate
files.
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 9:37 AM, William Stein wrote:
>
> 2009/6/17 eduardo :
>>
>> hi all
>> on o a debian linux, 64 bits i got this failure
>
> Thi
2009/6/17 eduardo :
>
> hi all
> on o a debian linux, 64 bits i got this failure
This happens if you have the optional cremona database installed. It's
a known problem (I reported it to trac yesterday).
William
>
>
> sage -t "devel/sage/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_egros.py"
>
hi all
on o a debian linux, 64 bits i got this failure
sage -t "devel/sage/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_egros.py"
**
File "/home/ocampo/sage-3.2.3/devel/sage/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/
ell_egros.py", line 63:
sage: [
> As Nick noted, I accidentally did sage -sdist sage-... instead of just
> using the version number at the end; for anyone working on a release
> in the future, just a tip -- that doesn't work too well. ;)
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6338
Nick
--~--~-~--~~~
> No, it is not deliberate. There is now an rc2 with this fixed an some other
> things fixed:
>
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/wstein/farm/src/sage-4.0.2.rc2.tar
>
> Craig just made the above, by the way.
>
Actually, this isn't going to be the final rc2 -- I had added a
handful of fixes,
John Cremona wrote:
> On rc2 64-bit I get one failure:
> sage -t "devel/sage/sage/misc/banner.py"
>
Same here on Fedora 10, 32 bit
Jaap
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send
On 16-Jun-09, at 7:27 AM, John Cremona wrote:
>
> On rc2 64-bit I get one failure:
> sage -t "devel/sage/sage/misc/banner.py"
Just a guess: sage -sdist was tagged with sage-4.0.2.rc2 instead of
just 4.0.2.rc2.
Nick
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this grou
On rc2 64-bit I get one failure:
sage -t "devel/sage/sage/misc/banner.py"
Here's the detail:
**
File "/home/jec/sage-4.0.2.rc2/devel/sage/sage/misc/banner.py", line 125:
sage: print "Sage major version is %s" % version_dict
Both David Joyner's and Jaap's test failures are the ones Craig and I
fixed earlier today at #6303, so that should go away when the second
patch there is merged. People might want to try applying it
themselves.
John
2009/6/16 Jaap Spies :
>
> William Stein wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've created sage-
William Stein wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've created sage-4.0.2.rc1 which is here:
>
>
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/wstein/release/4.0.2/rc1/sage-4.0.2.rc1/dist/sage-4.0.2.rc1.tar
>
> You can upgrade by doing
>
> sage -upgrade
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/wstein/release/4.0.2/r
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Jaap Spies wrote:
>
> William Stein wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 12:28 PM, davidloeffler
>> wrote:
>>> I notice that you still have libm4ri-20090512.spkg in this version,
>>> rather than malb's updated libm4ri-20090615.spkg. Is this deliberate?
>>
>> No, it i
4.0.2.rc1 installed fine (updating from 4.0.2.rc0) but had exactly one failure
in sage -testall on a 10.4 intel macbook:
zeus:~/sagefiles/sage-4.0.2.rc0 davidjoyner$ ./sage -t
"devel/sage/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_element.pyx"
sage -t "devel/sage/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_e
William Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 12:28 PM, davidloeffler
> wrote:
>> I notice that you still have libm4ri-20090512.spkg in this version,
>> rather than malb's updated libm4ri-20090615.spkg. Is this deliberate?
>
> No, it is not deliberate. There is now an rc2 with this fixed an so
One of the remaining failures in rc1 was fixed by the patch at #6303
which does not seem to have been merged yet (Craig Citro and I fixed
it earlier today). If that is right, there may still be failures with
rc2, but we were a bit confused about whether the second patch there
was necessary or not
2009/6/16 William Stein :
>
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 1:11 PM, John Cremona wrote:
>>
>> 2009/6/16 davidloeffler :
>>>
>>> Wow, that's a fast release cycle :-)
>>>
>>> On Jun 16, 12:34 pm, William Stein wrote:
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 12:28 PM, davidloeffler
wrote:
> I notice
2009/6/16 davidloeffler :
>
> Wow, that's a fast release cycle :-)
That's what happens when you have a tag team.
As soon as somebody volunteers to be release manager for Sage-4.0.3,
or we could start that release cycle. (See the sage-release post I
made earlier today.)
William
>
> On Jun 16,
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 1:11 PM, John Cremona wrote:
>
> 2009/6/16 davidloeffler :
>>
>> Wow, that's a fast release cycle :-)
>>
>> On Jun 16, 12:34 pm, William Stein wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 12:28 PM, davidloeffler
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > I notice that you still have libm4ri-20090512.spk
2009/6/16 davidloeffler :
>
> Wow, that's a fast release cycle :-)
>
> On Jun 16, 12:34 pm, William Stein wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 12:28 PM, davidloeffler
>> wrote:
>>
>> > I notice that you still have libm4ri-20090512.spkg in this version,
>> > rather than malb's updated libm4ri-200906
Wow, that's a fast release cycle :-)
On Jun 16, 12:34 pm, William Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 12:28 PM, davidloeffler
> wrote:
>
> > I notice that you still have libm4ri-20090512.spkg in this version,
> > rather than malb's updated libm4ri-20090615.spkg. Is this deliberate?
>
> No, i
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 12:28 PM, davidloeffler wrote:
>
> I notice that you still have libm4ri-20090512.spkg in this version,
> rather than malb's updated libm4ri-20090615.spkg. Is this deliberate?
No, it is not deliberate. There is now an rc2 with this fixed an some other
things fixed:
http:/
I notice that you still have libm4ri-20090512.spkg in this version,
rather than malb's updated libm4ri-20090615.spkg. Is this deliberate?
The former failed to build for lots of people (including me).
David
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to
Hi David,
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 7:57 PM, davidloeffler wrote:
>
> I actually got an error (rather than a warning) from the docstring for
> elliptic curve period lattices -- a typo, "\signa", had confused
> LaTeX.
This has been fixed at #6297. It has positive review, but not yet merged.
--
2009/6/16 davidloeffler :
>
>
>
> On Jun 16, 2:15 am, Nick Alexander wrote:
>> On 15-Jun-09, at 4:22 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>>
>>
>> > "Someone didn't format their reST correctly, so building the reference
>> > manual now produces warnings/errors."
>>
>> Has the reference manual ever built co
On Jun 16, 2:15 am, Nick Alexander wrote:
> On 15-Jun-09, at 4:22 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
>
> > "Someone didn't format their reST correctly, so building the reference
> > manual now produces warnings/errors."
>
> Has the reference manual ever built correctly? (I always get tons of
> noi
> In alpha2, m4ri fails to build on OS X 10.5 PPC (the computer in Craig
> Citro's office). I'm trying rc0 now:
>
Ah, I really need to get an account on that machine one day. (I'm not
kidding -- I don't actually have one.) Also, I should find out the
hostname so I can ssh in. William, do you hav
On Jun 15, 7:59 pm, Nick Alexander wrote:
> > Nick is right that rebuilding the docs is a pain. But as has been
> > pointed out before, you can rebuild the HTML version once in a new
> > branch, then only changed files get rebuilt the next time.
>
> make ptestlong does not appear to benefit from
> Nick is right that rebuilding the docs is a pain. But as has been
> pointed out before, you can rebuild the HTML version once in a new
> branch, then only changed files get rebuilt the next time.
make ptestlong does not appear to benefit from this. I get some
rubbish about "configuration ha
On Jun 15, 4:22 pm, John H Palmieri wrote:
> people should be
> checking that the reference manual builds correctly before submitting
> their patches, and then also before submitting positive reviews for
> someone else's patches.
I agree 100% with John's comments on this, and he is right that
64-bit Ubuntu 8.10 on Intel Core Duo
All tests passed as upgrade from 4.0.2.rc0
Builds from source for both 4.0.2.rc0 and 4.0.2.rc1 yield as a final
message the curious:
The following tests failed:
sage -t devel/sage/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py
# 0 doctests failed
The l
On Jun 15, 5:15 pm, Nick Alexander wrote:
> On 15-Jun-09, at 4:22 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 15, 12:13 am, Nick Alexander wrote:
> >> Hi all,
>
> >> Here's Sage 4.0.2.rc0. Come and get it while it's hot:
>
> > The following response to this release announcement was autogenerat
Nick Alexander wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Here's Sage 4.0.2.rc0. Come and get it while it's hot:
>
On Ubuntu 9.04 on an EeePC 901 with Atom N270:
The following tests failed:
sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/modules/free_module.py"
sage -t -long
"devel/sage/sage/rings/number_field/num
On 15-Jun-09, at 4:22 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
> On Jun 15, 12:13 am, Nick Alexander wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Here's Sage 4.0.2.rc0. Come and get it while it's hot:
>
> The following response to this release announcement was autogenerated
> by the Sage docbot:
>
> "Someone didn't format thei
All tests pass under 64-bit Fedora 10.
Kiran
On Jun 15, 3:13 am, Nick Alexander wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Here's Sage 4.0.2.rc0. Come and get it while it's hot:
>
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/ncalexan/releases
>
> We merged all of the tickets with positive review on trac (save one
> that
On Jun 15, 12:13 am, Nick Alexander wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Here's Sage 4.0.2.rc0. Come and get it while it's hot:
The following response to this release announcement was autogenerated
by the Sage docbot:
"Someone didn't format their reST correctly, so building the reference
manual now produces wa
I only got the known singular.pyx and and number_field_element.pyx
failures on an intel mac running 10.4.11.
-M. Hampton
On Jun 15, 1:13 am, Nick Alexander wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Here's Sage 4.0.2.rc0. Come and get it while it's hot:
>
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/ncalexan/releases
>
>
On 15 Jun 2009, at 03:13, Nick Alexander wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Here's Sage 4.0.2.rc0. Come and get it while it's hot:
>
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/ncalexan/releases
On OS X 10.5 Intel, four tests failed. The first two failures were
exactly as already reported by William Stein:
On Jun 15, 9:57 am, William Stein wrote:
> File
> "/Users/was/build/sage-4.0.2.rc0/devel/sage/doc/en/bordeaux_2008/birds_other.rst",
> line 212:
> sage: w = bernoulli(10, num_threads=16) # 1.87 seconds
> Exception raised:
> Traceback (most recent call last):
[...]
This is now
2009/6/15 John Cremona :
> 2009/6/15 Nick Alexander :
>>
That is on old issue: L.primes_above(6) tries to sort the primes but
there are tie-break situations where the order is not determined;
and
pari's output is often different on 32-or 64-bit machines. Unless
someone ca
On 15 Jun 2009, at 03:13, Nick Alexander wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Here's Sage 4.0.2.rc0. Come and get it while it's hot:
>
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/ncalexan/releases
libm4ri failed to build on a G4 PowerBook with OS X 10.5:
checking the number of available CPUs... 1
checking the num
2009/6/15 Nick Alexander :
>
>>> That is on old issue: L.primes_above(6) tries to sort the primes but
>>> there are tie-break situations where the order is not determined;
>>> and
>>> pari's output is often different on 32-or 64-bit machines. Unless
>>> someone can come up with a reliable way of
>> That is on old issue: L.primes_above(6) tries to sort the primes but
>> there are tie-break situations where the order is not determined;
>> and
>> pari's output is often different on 32-or 64-bit machines. Unless
>> someone can come up with a reliable way of sorting primes in a number
>> f
John Cremona wrote:
> Built fine and passed all tests on 64-bit Ubuntu.
>
> Built fine, 2 test failyres on 32-bit Suse: the singular.pyx issue
> already reported, and
>
> **
> File
> "/local/jec/sage-4.0.2.rc0/devel/sage/sage/
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 7:01 PM, John Cremona wrote:
>
> Built fine and passed all tests on 64-bit Ubuntu.
>
> Built fine, 2 test failyres on 32-bit Suse: the singular.pyx issue
> already reported, and
>
> **
> File
> "/local/je
Built fine and passed all tests on 64-bit Ubuntu.
Built fine, 2 test failyres on 32-bit Suse: the singular.pyx issue
already reported, and
**
File
"/local/jec/sage-4.0.2.rc0/devel/sage/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_elem
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 5:09 PM, Martin
Albrecht wrote:
>
> On Monday 15 June 2009, William Stein wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Martin
>>
>> Albrecht wrote:
>> >> sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/libs/singular/singular.pyx"
>> >> *
On Monday 15 June 2009, William Stein wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Martin
>
> Albrecht wrote:
> >> sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/libs/singular/singular.pyx"
> >> **
> >> File
> >> "/Users/was/build/sage-4.0.2.rc0/dev
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Martin
Albrecht wrote:
>
>> sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/libs/singular/singular.pyx"
>> **
>> File
>> "/Users/was/build/sage-4.0.2.rc0/devel/sage/sage/libs/singular/singular.pyx
>>", line 501:
>>
> sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/libs/singular/singular.pyx"
> **
> File
> "/Users/was/build/sage-4.0.2.rc0/devel/sage/sage/libs/singular/singular.pyx
>", line 501:
> sage: P(2^32-1)
> Expected:
> -1
> Got:
> 429496729
1 - 100 of 121 matches
Mail list logo
