[sage-support] Re: Installing Sage 4.2.1 in Mac OS X 10.5.6

2009-12-11 Thread Gennaro Alphonse
Thanks for the answer. It was helpful. --Gennaro -- To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URL:

Re: [sage-support] Installing Sage 4.2.1 in Mac OS X 10.5.6

2009-12-11 Thread Robert Bradshaw
Try copying sage onto your local hard drive (e.g into Applications) before starting it up. On Dec 11, 2009, at 11:28 AM, Gennaro Alphonse wrote: > I download Sage 4.2.1 for Mac OS 10.5 with Intel, and when I select > the sage file to run with the terminal, it give me the next message: > > The S

[sage-support] Installing Sage 4.2.1 in Mac OS X 10.5.6

2009-12-11 Thread Gennaro Alphonse
I download Sage 4.2.1 for Mac OS 10.5 with Intel, and when I select the sage file to run with the terminal, it give me the next message: The Sage install tree may have moved. Regenerating Python.pyo and .pyc files that hardcode the install PATH (please wait at most a few minutes)... Do not interru

[sage-support] Re: dense matrix over the ring

2009-12-11 Thread Gennaro Alphonse
Thanks for the answer, but i can't calculate matrix of that size you mention and I used the command matrix(ZZ, 3000, 3000), and with 1024mb ram in the virtual machine I obtain the same. I also used sage 4.2 in Ubuntu 9.10 64-bit, and i can calculate 5000 x 5000 matrix, but I need more than that, an

[sage-support] Re: zero

2009-12-11 Thread ma...@mendelu.cz
fixed in http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7356 On 11 pro, 19:18, marcW wrote: > hi, > I'm new at this, some experience with mathematica. > I spent the better part of 2 days trying to find out why > f= a*x > g=f.subs({a:0.6}] > show(g) > > produces so many zeroes.lol. It's laughable. > I'

[sage-support] Re: zero

2009-12-11 Thread Jason Grout
marcW wrote: > hi, > I'm new at this, some experience with mathematica. > I spent the better part of 2 days trying to find out why > f= a*x > g=f.subs({a:0.6}] > show(g) > > produces so many zeroes.lol. It's laughable. > I've never seen something like this. > It shouldn't be complicated to get rid

[sage-support] zero

2009-12-11 Thread marcW
hi, I'm new at this, some experience with mathematica. I spent the better part of 2 days trying to find out why f= a*x g=f.subs({a:0.6}] show(g) produces so many zeroes.lol. It's laughable. I've never seen something like this. It shouldn't be complicated to get rid of these zeros right? -- To po