Hello Michael,
> Ok, if that does the trick I will merge the fix into 2.8.14 provided
> it compiles locally on the test boxen (which it should). I looked at
> the configure log in detail and it seems very weired that it fails
> that late because it does find a gmp and gmp headers.
Hm, I'm not sur
On Nov 24, 5:11 pm, Alexander Dreyer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello William and Michael,
>
> > > > This looks like a 64 bit SuSE 10.1 box - am I correct?
> Yes.
> > > Also, do you have GMP installed system-wide? It could be
> > > some broken weird GMP that confuses the mpfi build
> > > scri
Hello William and Michael,
> > > This looks like a 64 bit SuSE 10.1 box - am I correct?
Yes.
> > Also, do you have GMP installed system-wide? It could be
> > some broken weird GMP that confuses the mpfi build
> > script.
Yes, GMP ist installed systemwide.
> Yep, I suspect something similar, but
On Nov 23, 6:55 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Nov 23, 2007 4:38 AM, mabshoff
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 23, 9:15 am, Alexander Dreyer
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
Hello Alexander,
> > Hello Alexander,
>
> > > sage-2.8.13 fails to build on the followin
On Nov 23, 2007 4:38 AM, mabshoff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Nov 23, 9:15 am, Alexander Dreyer
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello Alexander,
>
> > sage-2.8.13 fails to build on the following system:
> > Linux node179 2.6.16.27-0.6-smp-perfctr #2 SMP Thu Oct 11 10:04:48
> > CEST 2007
On Nov 23, 9:15 am, Alexander Dreyer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Alexander,
> sage-2.8.13 fails to build on the following system:
> Linux node179 2.6.16.27-0.6-smp-perfctr #2 SMP Thu Oct 11 10:04:48
> CEST 2007 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
This looks like a 64 bit SuSE 10.1 box - am I
sage-2.8.13 fails to build on the following system:
Linux node179 2.6.16.27-0.6-smp-perfctr #2 SMP Thu Oct 11 10:04:48
CEST 2007 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Best regards,
Alexander Dreyer
PS: The crucial part of the logs:
GCC Version
gcc
Dear Michael,
On Nov 22, 11:25 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
dortmund.de> wrote:
> > 1) The upgrade was interactive. At some point, vim opened, and apparently
> >i was supposed to insert some text. Is there some "hg commit" involved
> >in the upgrading process?
>
> This is because you h
On Nov 22, 11:01 am, Simon King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear William,
Hello Simon,
>
> i met two problems when i upgraded to 2.8.13
> (sudo sage -upgrade)
>
> 1) The upgrade was interactive. At some point, vim opened, and apparently
>i was supposed to insert some text. Is there some "
William Stein wrote:
> On Nov 21, 2007 4:04 PM, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> William Stein wrote:
>>> Hello folks,
>>> 2.8.14 is planned for next week, depending on how close the release
>>> will be to Sage Bug Day 6 on November 2nd, 2007 we might do another
>> December 2nd?
>
> Is th
On Nov 21, 2007 4:04 PM, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> William Stein wrote:
> > Hello folks,
>
> >
> > 2.8.14 is planned for next week, depending on how close the release
> > will be to Sage Bug Day 6 on November 2nd, 2007 we might do another
>
> December 2nd?
Is there something wrong
William Stein wrote:
> Hello folks,
>
> 2.8.14 is planned for next week, depending on how close the release
> will be to Sage Bug Day 6 on November 2nd, 2007 we might do another
December 2nd?
Jaap
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage
12 matches
Mail list logo
