Dear all,
Should we go on stripping down upstream tarballs from stuff we don't use
when there is some substantial gain?
See http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17169 (GCC) and
http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15015 (MPIR).
We can debate forever on when the gain becomes substantial in comparison
with
The following is just a statement, not an opinion:
The new GCC spkg is 50MB larger than the old stripped-down one (86MB vs.
36MB)
The largest packages currently in Sage are:
86MB gcc-4.9.2.tar.bz2
35MB sagenb-0.11.0.tar
30MB jmol-14.2.4_2014.08.03.tar.bz2
28MB r-3.1.1.tar.gz
16MB ppl-1.1
I personally think we should stick with vanilla upstream as much as possible.
There
are currently two cases where sliming down the tarball is probably useful:
* the latest gcc
* gap - which is not in Jeroen’s list because it is already completely
stripped down.
You should check upstream size if
IMHO we should only modify upstream tarballs if we have to (e.g. strip out
non-free parts). The upstream tarballs are cached, so its just a one-time
download anyways.
On Friday, October 31, 2014 9:54:56 AM UTC, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> Should we go on stripping down upstream
Yo !
Does Math directorate pay for programmers to write open-source versions
> of commercial software?
>
Of course not. It is just that when commercial softwares fail to do the
job, we have to do it in their stead. And we cannot seriously expect them
to implement what we need for our researc
Hi Volker,
On 2014-10-31, Volker Braun wrote:
> --=_Part_1546_392576408.1414752441684
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> IMHO we should only modify upstream tarballs if we have to (e.g. strip out
> non-free parts). The upstream tarballs are cached, so its just a one-time
> downlo
>
>
> >
> > IMHO we should only modify upstream tarballs if we have to (e.g. strip
> out
> > non-free parts). The upstream tarballs are cached, so its just a
> one-time
> > download anyways.
>
> There are people who have a very bad band-with. In my case, it's fine
> when I am at university.
Oh come on, cry me a river. The average top-1000 web page is well over a
megabyte nowadays. A one-time download of 50mb is a minor convenience at
best. We are talking about the equivalent of maybe 30 page visits.
On Friday, October 31, 2014 11:48:47 AM UTC, Simon King wrote:
>
> Hi Volker,
>
However (local) caching is used in those cases as well, so it's only a pain
the first time you visit a website. The router to where I work in my home
setup is not shabby, but it's still took some 10 minutes to download GCC.
For a while I thought something had stalled. 86 MB to 36 MB is a huge
r
>
> How hard would it be to switch from the singular interface to the
> MAcualay2 one for the polynomial stuff?
>
I believe Macaulay 2 also uses Singular for its basic polynomial stuff:
http://www.math.uiuc.edu/Macaulay2/doc/Macaulay2-1.6/share/doc/Macaulay2/Macaulay2Doc/html/___Acknowledgeme
I looked at the NSF-OCI solicitation. Maybe I'm not seeing what you think
is a target.
I found this
- Enable academic departments, disciplinary and cross-disciplinary
units, or multi-organization consortia to renovate research facilities
through the addition or augmentation of cyber
Yo !
Hey, just to make it clear: I am not supporting their grant request
industry. I could not care less, and if anything I just hate to see
that people use Sage (which includes some of my own work) to request
solid money for themselves.
I just did not want to let you have the last word w
OMG you had to wait 10 minutes instead of 4 minutes
On Friday, October 31, 2014 2:59:52 PM UTC, Travis Scrimshaw wrote:
>
> However (local) caching is used in those cases as well, so it's only a
> pain the first time you visit a website. The router to where I work in my
> home setup is not
Thanks for the info. I didn't know that. Anyways, it seems that Macaulay2
only uses Singular-Factory and Singular-Libfac for a few functions (factor,
gcd minimalprimes and irreduciblecharacteristicseries). So for all the
other stuff, it would stil be useful to compare the results given by
Macu
14 matches
Mail list logo
