Oh, sure, I could build from source. But I'd rather see the binary distribution fixed.
On Nov 12, 3:43 pm, "Justin C. Walker" <jus...@mac.com> wrote: > On Nov 11, 2011, at 13:27 , Bill Janssen wrote: > > > I've downloaded and installed sage on my OS X 10.5 (Leopard) Mac Pro. > > I'm trying to do some image processing, but things seem a bit bollixed > > up. It seems to me that if you're going to depend on a library that's > > installed in some non-standard place (I have no idea what would > > create /opt/local/lib) you should instead package it with and in the > > Sage tree. > > It sounds like you installed a binary release, rather than built Sage from > source. True? If so, it appears that whoever built the binary did so > without modifying his PATH to exclude the MacPorts stuff. > > You may have better luck building from source. > > Justin > > -- > Justin C. Walker > Curmudgeon-at-large > Director > Institute for the Absorption of Federal Funds > ---- > 186,000 Miles per Second > Not just a good idea: > it's the law! > ---- -- 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: http://www.sagemath.org
