Re: [sage-devel] Re: Proposed Project
That does sound interesting. However, I'm concerned that the DS won't be able to handle it entirely onboard. Looking at the specs, the DS only has 4M of ram (with a possible extension of unknown size). If one went for the 3DS (which has significantly higher specs), you might be able to run a light version of sage. The other option would be to use the onboard WiFi to connect to a server that does all the actual number-crunching and simply display stuff on the DS. Then the big issue would simply be the math handwriting detection (I say simply, but it's not that simple). Sounds like an interesting project, but I don't know that I can help much either (not having a DS and all) -- Jason E -- -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
Re: [sage-devel] Re: Error building using a 64 bit machine with a 32 bit Linux
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 11:54 AM, tvn wrote: >> >> >> It's *really* strange to me that the standard 32-bit Debian installation >> image would come with a 64-bit kernel, since that would be physically >> impossible to run on a real 32-bit system, and the standard 32-bit >> Debian installation image should obviously be able to run on a real >> 32-bit system. >> > > I see -- no idea why though, perhaps to take advantage of some of the 64 bit > features from the hardware but also to maintain 32 bit compatibility ? But > anyway, such a situation exists -- is there a quick fix, such as editing > some FLAG, so Sage will build a 32 bit version ? While that setup is a little unusual, it shouldn't effectively be any different than any other 32bit system. (unless sage uses uname to gather build information). Can you give a more detailed build error? Specifically, look at the log from the libgcrypt spkg, that should show how it failed. --Jason Ekstrand -- -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
Re: [sage-devel] Sage server port forwarding
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 10:20 PM, Nils Bruin wrote: > Another solution is to use "iptables nat" to forward the port: > > iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 443 -j REDIRECT -- > to-port 8000 > > Any comments on the pros and cons of these approaches? I thought one > of the pros is that iptables is virtually sure to be running already, > whereas apache might not be. One advantage to using something like Apache or nginx (I'm planning to post nginx configs to the wiki in a week or two) is that you can set it up so that port 80 automatically redirects to the secure one. That way if someone simply types sage.mydomain.com into their web browser it initially connects to 80 and gets automatically redirected to 443 (https). This can make the whole setup much less confusing. --Jason Ekstrand -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
Re: [sage-devel] Re: C build problems on MacOS 10.7 Lion.
Ok, that makes a lot more sense. I guess my next question would be, is there a way we could bundle the whole thing so that users don't need to download the command line tools? I know we have several users in our department who use the minimum rank library and beyond that have no reason to be doing development and don't even know what they're installing. It would make it much nicer for the end-user. --Jason On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 10:42 AM, William Stein wrote: > On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Jason Ekstrand wrote: >> Jason, >> I'll get back to you on the details in a few days when I actually have >> a mac sitting on my desk to test with. I guess the next question is, >> If you have to have command line tools installed anyway, why are we >> bundling gcc? > > Apple's compilers are buggy. > > Also, before I could install the OS X command line tools, I had to > first install XCode. People keep suggesting on this thread that the > command line tools are currently an *alternative* to XCode, but for me > at least that did not seem to be the case. > > -- William > >> --Jason >> >> >> >> On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Jason Grout >> wrote: >>> On 5/24/12 9:45 AM, Jason Ekstrand wrote: >>>> >>>> Here is the problem: Sage 5 ships with GCC bundled in so that mac >>>> users can install sage and build sage packages without having to have >>>> the mac build toolchain (It makes sage much easier to install for the >>>> end user). There is a problem in the way it was bundled (specifically >>>> regarding limits.h and possibly others) that prevents it from building >>>> certain C extensions (i.e. Jason Grout's Minimum Rank library). These >>>> problems probably have not come into light before because everyone who >>>> has tested the bundle is a developer and so they already have the dev >>>> tools installed. If I'm misunderstanding the purpose of bundling GCC >>>> into sage 5, please let me know. >>> >>> >>> >>> Georg's message indicates that you *do* need the OSX command line tools >>> installed to get the system headers (which would be necessary for compiling >>> extensions). So then the question is: do you have the OSX command line >>> tools installed (which is a different question than if you have XCode >>> installed). >>> >>> In other words, if I understand Georg and Dima correctly, the answer to your >>> original question: >>> >>> >>> "It appears as if the version of the limits.h file bundled in with sage >>> depends on the system's limits.h file which does not exist on a standard >>> MacOS 10.7 install. How do you recommend dealing with this?" >>> >>> is: Install the OSX command line tools (not XCode), which include such a >>> header file. >>> >>> Disclaimer: I don't have 10.7, so I can't test my answer above. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Jason >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to >>> sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel >>> URL: http://www.sagemath.org >> >> -- >> To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to >> sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel >> URL: http://www.sagemath.org > > > > -- > William Stein > Professor of Mathematics > University of Washington > http://wstein.org > > -- > To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to > sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel > URL: http://www.sagemath.org -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
Re: [sage-devel] Re: C build problems on MacOS 10.7 Lion.
Jason, I'll get back to you on the details in a few days when I actually have a mac sitting on my desk to test with. I guess the next question is, If you have to have command line tools installed anyway, why are we bundling gcc? --Jason On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Jason Grout wrote: > On 5/24/12 9:45 AM, Jason Ekstrand wrote: >> >> Here is the problem: Sage 5 ships with GCC bundled in so that mac >> users can install sage and build sage packages without having to have >> the mac build toolchain (It makes sage much easier to install for the >> end user). There is a problem in the way it was bundled (specifically >> regarding limits.h and possibly others) that prevents it from building >> certain C extensions (i.e. Jason Grout's Minimum Rank library). These >> problems probably have not come into light before because everyone who >> has tested the bundle is a developer and so they already have the dev >> tools installed. If I'm misunderstanding the purpose of bundling GCC >> into sage 5, please let me know. > > > > Georg's message indicates that you *do* need the OSX command line tools > installed to get the system headers (which would be necessary for compiling > extensions). So then the question is: do you have the OSX command line > tools installed (which is a different question than if you have XCode > installed). > > In other words, if I understand Georg and Dima correctly, the answer to your > original question: > > > "It appears as if the version of the limits.h file bundled in with sage > depends on the system's limits.h file which does not exist on a standard > MacOS 10.7 install. How do you recommend dealing with this?" > > is: Install the OSX command line tools (not XCode), which include such a > header file. > > Disclaimer: I don't have 10.7, so I can't test my answer above. > > Thanks, > > Jason > > > > -- > To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to > sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel > URL: http://www.sagemath.org -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
Re: [sage-devel] Re: C build problems on MacOS 10.7 Lion.
I appreciate all the help people have been trying to give me concerning building sage from source. Unfortunately, this is not the problem. I understand build systems and have done a fair amount of software development on my own, and I know where to go to get the mac build tools. Here is the problem: Sage 5 ships with GCC bundled in so that mac users can install sage and build sage packages without having to have the mac build toolchain (It makes sage much easier to install for the end user). There is a problem in the way it was bundled (specifically regarding limits.h and possibly others) that prevents it from building certain C extensions (i.e. Jason Grout's Minimum Rank library). These problems probably have not come into light before because everyone who has tested the bundle is a developer and so they already have the dev tools installed. If I'm misunderstanding the purpose of bundling GCC into sage 5, please let me know. I haven't been able to provide any feedback yet because the machine having the problem is not my own (I'm a linux user). Our IT guy is going to be getting me a mac in the next few days so that I can have one sitting on my desk to do some testing to try and find more details about the problem. Once I get a chance to sit down at a mac and build some things, I'll get back to you all and let you know what I've found. --Jason Ekstrand On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 7:48 AM, Georg S. Weber wrote: > > > On Tuesday, 22 May 2012 23:26:52 UTC+2, Jason Ekstrand wrote: >> >> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Jason Grout >> wrote: >> > Sorry I haven't got back to you on this. Is XCode installed on the 10.7 >> > laptop? Also, I notice that the error messages seem to indicate that >> > you're >> > using the 10.6 binary; I wonder if that might be part of the problem? >> > Did >> > you compile 5.0 on the 10.7 machine, or did you download a binary? >> >> I'm not sitting at the machine right now, but I believe that XCode was >> installed. The "command line tools" are, however, NOT installed. But I >> believe the point of bundling GCC in with sage was to get rid of this >> problem, wasn't it? >> >> > Also, Jason, can you try executing the above? I think the file you are >> > using >> > is version 1.0.0 of the library, but the above code loads version 1.1.0. >> > I >> > doubt it will make a difference in the limits.h problem, but who knows. >> >> That was the first thing I tried. It gives the exact same error. >> >> --Jason Ekstrand > > > > Hi Jason, > > the Sage README.txt says: > " > > QUICK INSTRUCTIONS TO BUILD FROM SOURCE > --- > > The following steps briefly outline the process of building Sage from > source. More detailed instructions, including how to build faster on > multicore machines are contained later in this README and in the > Installation Guide: > > http://www.sagemath.org/doc/installation > > 1. Make sure you have the dependencies and 3 GB of free disk space. > >Linux: gcc, make, m4, perl, ranlib, and tar. >(install these using your package manager) >On recent Debian or Ubuntu systems (in particular Ubuntu 12.04 >"Precise"), you need the dpkg-dev package. > >OS X: Xcode. Make sure you have installed the most recent version >of Xcode. For pre-Lion versions of OS X, you can download Xcode >from http://developer.apple.com/downloads/. For OS X Lion, you can >install it using the App Store. With Xcode 4.3 or later, you need >to install the "Command Line Tools": from the File menu, choose >"Preferences", then the "Downloads" tab, and then "Install" the >Command Line Tools. > > " > > As mentioned in this thread, one can install those (e.g. "late march") > command line tools independently of XCode, but they are indispensable. They > install (amongst other stuff) what in Linux land would be called "kernel > headers" and "C library/runtime headers", in OS X nomenclature this is named > "SDK". Sage does bundle GCC now, but not some C library/runtime --- nor, > what is more important, any respective system headers. In Debian Linux, the > couterpart of these "command line tools" would be the "build-essential" > (AFAIR) metabundle, so the requirement to have this available when trying to > build C sources, is not really OS X specific. (But with XCode 4.2 and > earlier, this came more or less automatically as a part of XCode, which is > no longer the case with the "fully application-like" XCode 4.3 and younger)
Re: [sage-devel] Re: C build problems on MacOS 10.7 Lion.
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Jason Grout wrote: > Sorry I haven't got back to you on this. Is XCode installed on the 10.7 > laptop? Also, I notice that the error messages seem to indicate that you're > using the 10.6 binary; I wonder if that might be part of the problem? Did > you compile 5.0 on the 10.7 machine, or did you download a binary? I'm not sitting at the machine right now, but I believe that XCode was installed. The "command line tools" are, however, NOT installed. But I believe the point of bundling GCC in with sage was to get rid of this problem, wasn't it? > Also, Jason, can you try executing the above? I think the file you are using > is version 1.0.0 of the library, but the above code loads version 1.1.0. I > doubt it will make a difference in the limits.h problem, but who knows. That was the first thing I tried. It gives the exact same error. --Jason Ekstrand -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
