On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 5:23 PM, wrote:
>
> On Saturday, August 23, 2014 6:28:33 PM UTC-5, Chris Maness wrote:
>>
>> I am thinking I am not a big fan of using the sage -upgrade command since
>> it downloads all the source and recompiles the whole thing from source. Is
>> there a clean way to upg
On Saturday, August 23, 2014 6:28:33 PM UTC-5, Chris Maness wrote:
>
> I am thinking I am not a big fan of using the sage -upgrade command since
> it downloads all the source and recompiles the whole thing from source. Is
> there a clean way to upgrade using binaries?
>
Before offering advice
I am thinking I am not a big fan of using the sage -upgrade command since
it downloads all the source and recompiles the whole thing from source. Is
there a clean way to upgrade using binaries?
Regards,
Chris
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-su
On Saturday, August 23, 2014 12:08:40 AM UTC+1, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
> Anyhow, you seem to hit the bug fixed in http://trac.sagemath.org/16796
> (this fix is not in 6.3)
>
Ah yes, forgot that we are talking about the OSX < 10.9 bug. This will be
in 6.4.beta2, so it might be best to wait a we
I do not understand why you are using the symbolic ring and not a
polynomial ring (in several variables). The symbolic ring is very slow
for everything.
I did not fully understand your question, but here at least is an
example involving polynomial rings
sage: K = GF(2)
sage: n=4; R = PolynomialRi
On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 8:49 AM, jonhanke wrote:
> Dear Sage-support,
>
> I'd like to use cloud.sagemath.com to compute the subfields F of the Hilbert
> class field of QQ(sqrt(-39)), which is a Galois extension of QQ with Galois
> group D_8. For number fields defined by a single polynomial it see
