There is a special kind of hell for network admins that block port 22...
On Wednesday, December 17, 2014 4:12:59 PM UTC+1, john_perry_usm wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm running the command
>
> git push --set-upstream trac HEAD:u/john_perry/
> coeffs_confusion_polynomials
>
> and getting the response
>
Vincent wrote:
> Sorry to disturb. This discussion should go to the relevant ticket...
>
You are right. I have now voiced my concerns there:
http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17480
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe fro
Nathann
I usually run ssh through a high-numbered port, partly because it
supposedly helps avoid the most common hackers, but I've also read that it
circumvents poorly considered anti-piracy firewalls (i.e., people blocking
who ports 22 and 80 but leave other ports wide open). I didn't try logg
>
> Could it be a temporary issue, did you try again?
I had tried several times from where I was. I left, somewhat disappointed &
frustrated, & tried again w/exactly the same command at the apartment where
I'm staying, and it worked. That's why I think it was a location issue.
--
You receiv
Yo !
On Wednesday, December 17, 2014 10:02:28 PM UTC+5:30, john_perry_usm wrote:
>
> The problem seems to have resolved itself, apparently because I moved to a
> different location! I'm visiting another university, and they may be
> blocking it, though I'm not sure. Hopefully this thread will he
On 2014-12-17, john_perry_usm wrote:
> --=_Part_530_1309897652.1418829692189
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> boundary="=_Part_531_1594971767.1418829692189"
>
> --=_Part_531_1594971767.1418829692189
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> I've verified that ssh key
The problem seems to have resolved itself, apparently because I moved to a
different location! I'm visiting another university, and they may be
blocking it, though I'm not sure. Hopefully this thread will help someone
else.
Thank you for the help.
john perry
--
You received this message beca
Here
http://ww2.ii.uj.edu.pl/~zgliczyn/cap07/krawczyk.pdf
you can see the same criterion for functions from R^n to R^n. You just
need to check that the complex corresponds to the case of R^2.
El miércoles, 17 de diciembre de 2014 09:28:10 UTC+1, Fredrik Johansson
escribió:
>
> On Tuesday, Dece
No, but that's a good idea. The functions you should look at are
filter_sources and sort_sources in sage.doctest.control. For adding
options to the parser for sage -t, see SAGE_LOCAL/bin/sage-runtests.
David
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 6:33 AM, john_perry_usm wrote:
>
> hello!
>
> I can see why some
I've verified that ssh key is uploaded to trac. git remove -v tells me,
origin git://trac.sagemath.org/sage.git (fetch)
origin git://trac.sagemath.org/sage.git (push)
trac git://trac.sagemath.org/sage.git (fetch)
trac g...@trac.sagemath.org:sage.git (push)
On Wednesday, December 17, 2014 6:17:31
On 2014-12-17, john_perry_usm wrote:
> --=_Part_5297_1488466620.1418829179323
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> boundary="=_Part_5298_621478437.1418829179323"
>
> --=_Part_5298_621478437.1418829179323
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm running th
Hello,
I'm running the command
git push --set-upstream trac HEAD:u/john_perry/coeffs_confusion_polynomials
and getting the response
ssh: connect to host trac.sagemath.org port 22: Operation timed out
fatal: Could not read from remote repository.
Please make sure you have the correct access rig
hello!
I can see why someone might want longer doctests to be tried first, but is
there a way to sort doctests so that *failed* doctests are tried first?
thanks
john perry
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this
On Wednesday, December 17, 2014 3:10:36 PM UTC+1, Simon King wrote:
>
> Hi Jean-Pierre,
>
> On 2014-12-17, Jean-Pierre Flori > wrote:
> > I guess this is:
> >
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/sage-devel/complex.h/sage-devel/iA3K1T8lPlQ/hyACRbExOkMJ
>
>
> Yes, thank you! Installi
Hi Jean-Pierre,
On 2014-12-17, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote:
> I guess this is:
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/sage-devel/complex.h/sage-devel/iA3K1T8lPlQ/hyACRbExOkMJ
Yes, thank you! Installing gcc-c++ did the trick.
This should really be mentioned in the installation guide!
Best rega
I guess this is:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/sage-devel/complex.h/sage-devel/iA3K1T8lPlQ/hyACRbExOkMJ
On Wednesday, December 17, 2014 2:33:46 PM UTC+1, Simon King wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> I just have now installed openSUSE 13.2 64bit on my laptop (it has
> previously
> been 12.3), and
Hi!
I just have now installed openSUSE 13.2 64bit on my laptop (it has previously
been 12.3), and now try to get Sage run again. In fact, the previously
built Sage in my home directory did still work. But I want to compile
from scratch, and thus I removed ~/.ccache and ~/.cycache, did "make distcl
Hello,
Sorry to disturb. This discussion should go to the relevant ticket...
Vincent
2014-12-17 12:08 UTC+01:00, Samuel Lelièvre :
> More thoughts.
>
> 0. It's good that you are refreshing this part of the documentation,
> if only to update references to Pyrex to references to Cython!
>
> 1. May
More thoughts.
0. It's good that you are refreshing this part of the documentation,
if only to update references to Pyrex to references to Cython!
1. Maybe it would be worth pointing to the subtle ways in which these
functions differ in names and in nature:
There are three relevant functions
Am 2014-12-17 um 10:47 schrieb Samuel Lelievre:
> Hello! Your rewording mentions "four relevant functions"
> but I can only see three listed.
thank you, I forgot to change that after unifying two descriptions.
Fixed (http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17480 ).
> Also, there is a typo: "DD NOT" for
Clemens Heuberger wrote:
>
> Am 2014-12-15 um 12:00 schrieb David Roe:
> > The difference is in how cpdef functions interact with Cython vs Python
> > classes. If you want to override a cpdef method in a *Python* subclass
> then you
> > must use def (of course). But in a *Cython* subclass, yo
On Tuesday, December 16, 2014 6:30:06 PM UTC+1, mmarco wrote:
>
>
>> I'm still looking for a good converse of Henrici's 6.4g for (2). In the
>> real case, it is sufficient to test that f'(x) != 0 for all x in the
>> interval (just a single polynomial evaluation using interval arithmetic).
>> Is
22 matches
Mail list logo
