[sage-devel] East Coast Computer Algebra Day
On Saturday, May 10, the next East Coast Computer Algebra Day is being held. The contributors to Sage might find it an interesting meeting. http://www.shepherd.edu/eccad2008/ I know that Sage sent a student last year. Tim --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Sage 3.0 is out
Hello folks, Sage 3.0 has been released on April 21st, 2008. It is available at http://sagemath.org/download.html * About Sage (http://www.sagemath.org) Sage is developed by volunteers and combines 71 open source packages. It is available for download from sagemath.org and its mirrors in source or binary form. If you have any questions and/or problems please report them to the google groups sage-devel or sage-support. You can also drop by in #sage-devel or #sage-support in freenode. - This is the Sources only release. We are building binaries right now and once those are done we will officially announce in roughly a day. Upgrades should work will small problems in the scripts repo - we will fix those hopefully by morning. If you had features integrated please add them to http://wiki.sagemath.org/sage-3.0 I just check and Carl Witty did his job, so maybe you should get to work ;) Cheers, Michael Abshoff (Release Chair), William Stein Merged in final: #2979: Michael Abshoff, Andrzej Giniewicz: force -O0 for clisp with gcc 4.3 #2987: Tim Abbott: Debian build support for zn_poly #2988: William Stein: notebook -- issues with the CSS for the print display #2989: William Stein: notebook -- issue with how the notebook is run that breaks it sometimes; also fix a typo in pid. #2990: William Stein: sage-3.0.rc1: calculus/functions.py segfault on debian64 xeon vmware image #2991: William Stein: fix dsage testdoc problem #2994: Michael Abshoff: polybori.spkg - fix permission issue of the headers --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Project
On Apr 22, 7:36 am, Bill Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 9:03 AM, William Stein wrote: Hello folks, ... In the defense of GCL, *most* components of Sage were a mess gcl is in way more of a mess than any other component in Sage I can imagine. But then I wasn't around in the early days of Sage ;) like above when I/you/whoever first tried to add them to Sage. I personally haven't tried much using cvs GCL only, partly because it scares me to use cvs for a deployed quality product. Since cvs might be broken one day, not the next, etc., and one has no clue if the code has been tested or not or what. The last released version is from 2005, and it's clear the website is just dead (maybe somebody lost the password?!) I mean, it just looks a little silly for the website (http://www.gnu.org/software/gcl/) to start with: NEW! (20050810) GCL 2.6.7 is released. The release notes can be found here. ... The GCL-devel mailing list has on average about 5-6 messages a month during the last couple of months, except for a bunch of messages in January about people trying to build GCL from cvs. No doubt about it - GCL does not have sufficient resources for maintenance and has been somewhat neglected of late. As you say: It is not a situation that you find entirely uncommon among the packages that have been added to Sage in the past. Necessity is what drives most of this kind of work. I've made a gcl Sage optional spkg: http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/was/tmp/gcl/gcl-20080421.spkg It's just GCL-from-cvs + a simple spkg-install. I have never got it to build on any system. It's a pretty big spkg, since it appears to include the entire gas assembler, some version of GMP, etc. Try it out and see if it *doesn't* work for you too :-) wgethttp://sage.math.washington.edu/home/was/tmp/gcl/gcl-20080421.spkg sage -i gcl-20080421.spkg Thanks. It doesn't work for me either. :-( You are right that the source is bloated by a bunch of code that it does not use. As I understand it gcl needs only a small part of binutils - depending on the build options for a particular system. Is this source from cvs head at: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gcl/ as of today? Yes. This version of GCL fails on my Solaris x86 system with the following obscure error message: gcc -c -fsigned-char -pipe -Wall -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -I/export/home0/wspa ge/gcl-sage/gcl-20080421/src/o -I../h -I../gcl-tk cmpaux.c cmpaux.c: In function `object_to_fcomplex': cmpaux.c:329: error: `_Imaginary_I' undeclared (first use in this function) cmpaux.c:329: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once cmpaux.c:329: error: for each function it appears in.) cmpaux.c: In function `object_to_dcomplex': cmpaux.c:366: error: `_Imaginary_I' undeclared (first use in this function) gmake[1]: *** [cmpaux.o] Error 1 rm list.c gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/export/home0/wspage/gcl-sage/gcl-20080421/src/o' gmake: *** [unixport/saved_pre_gcl] Error 2 That is an issue most likely with complex.h - IIRC _Imaginary_I is part of the Sun's libc or libm - I would need to check. --- At 'http://cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/gcl/?root=gcl'I see changes as recent as 3 months ago. The last time I built GCL from head was about 10 months ago. I tried 8 months or so ago and then roughly 4 months or so ago, both times with disastrous results. The most recent branch 'Version_2_6_8pre' is what we normally use to build Axiom. There is a change about 4 months old. If I recall correctly 'Version_2_6_8pre' actually corresponds to the version distributed on Debian and would probably be the most likely to be stable on the largest number of platforms. At least testing ships CVS head. And not to be too picky here: The last tarball from the website predates OSX 10.5 and also Solaris 10, so maybe it is time to cut another bug fix release since everybody seems to be using 2.6.8CVS anyway. But when I build stable releases I do not poke around in the CVS repo. Asking could have helped, but if nobody bothered to update the website in three years anyway what is the point? 2.6.7 actually also miserably fails on Solaris 9 for me, and that has been out for a while before 2.6.7. Bill Page -- I would be interested in any comments you might have. For example, is the fact that GCL doesn't build for us anywhere, something that you think we'll get passed by just trying harder? Or is it going to be really really hard. The fact that it doesn't build for you anywhere is definitely strange. I would give it a try again with $ cvs -z3 -d:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/sources/gcl co -r Version_2_6_8pre gcl I do expect that (with the right help) you will be able to build gcl everywhere that you build Sage. Instead of just trying harder I think it is very appropriate to ask for help. Only if there is no help forthcoming, perhaps I
[sage-devel] Re: Project
Michael, Wow, it sure it nice to have someone on the other end of the phone, so as to speak ... :-) I think it is really great that Google came through with financial support that is making it possible for you and others to dedicate so much time to this. On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 2:41 AM, mabshoff wrote: On Apr 22, 7:36 am, Bill Page wrote: ... The most recent branch 'Version_2_6_8pre' is what we normally use to build Axiom. There is a change about 4 months old. If I recall correctly 'Version_2_6_8pre' actually corresponds to the version distributed on Debian and would probably be the most likely to be stable on the largest number of platforms. At least testing ships CVS head. Are you sure? I suppose that we had better check with Camm. And not to be too picky here: The last tarball from the website predates OSX 10.5 and also Solaris 10, so maybe it is time to cut another bug fix release since everybody seems to be using 2.6.8CVS anyway. Yes, 2.6.8pre (as in pre-release). 2.6.8 was never officially released. But when I build stable releases I do not poke around in the CVS repo. Asking could have helped, but if nobody bothered to update the website in three years anyway what is the point? 2.6.7 actually also miserably fails on Solaris 9 for me, and that has been out for a while before 2.6.7. This is open source age and GCL existed well before that. I am not making excuses but ... ... Well, since the Maxima folks now have told us that they will support ecls soon the decision has been made on our end to switch to Maxima +ecls. Choose your own poison. ;-) Actually I don't know much about ecl but I seriously doubt the long term viability of ecl will be any different than the half dozen other alternatives. Of course I am all for co-operation between projects so if Maxima is willing to make a version that is more suitable for use in Sage, the more power (money and resources ...) to them! :-) There is no point in beating the dead horse that is gcl. I take offense. gcl is not a dead horse no matter how neglected it might look to you. ecls has MSVC support *today* and is probably trivially to port to Sun Forte if it doesn't run already. The mailing list is alive and well. I have looked at the code and fixed some issues myself, so why would I want to touch gcl? I don't know. The OpenAxiom and FriCAS forks of Axiom work on ecl so I am also not too worried about gcl in the long run. --- Anyway, none of this solves the immediate problem of providing support for symbolic mathematics in Sage without adding the burden of supporting Lisp in all target environments. Right now you depend on the linkage with Maxima for this feature, And I think you see symbolic manipulation as a particular domain or mode of computation within Sage rather than the reason d'etre of computer algebra systems. I would like to argue however that from an overall design perspective Axiom is a better match for Sage than Maxima. Like Sage itself, the Axiom library is built-up in a (more or less) rigorous manner from more fundamental mathematical constructions. One of these complex constructions is called 'Expression'. This is the domain in which most symbolic calculations are done in Axiom. However as it will be in Sage, it is necessary that Expression interact in a well-defined manner with other Axiom domains of computation. I believe that if you were to re-implement the Maxima symbolic functionality within Sage (Python) then you would essentially be implementing something rather similar to the Expression domain in Axiom. In the longer term (pending resolution of the remaining open source license issues), Aldor could provide much of the same set of functionality of Axiom through it's BasicMath and other libraries without the overhead of the Axiom interpreter interface. This would completely eliminate the need for Lisp. I still have some hope that this could happen in the near future. If Sage were to pursue this path, I think the Aldor license issues might be resolved more quickly. Well, I think NAG chose the non-commercial only license on purpose. Well yes, of course it was on purpose. They have stated that they felt obligated to do this by the terms under which they originally received Axiom (and Aldor) from IBM. NAG itself is a non-commerical organization. We have discussed the issue here before and everybody agrees that it is GPL incompatible. Yes, that is the said truth. Some people at NAG apparently also have a philosophical disagreement with the Free Software Foundation about the reasonableness of GPL but I am still optimistic that this can be overcome. Afterall, you can only shoot yourself in the foot so many times ... ;-) But I have little hope that Sage's potential interest in Aldor would get somebody to change the license. I think you greatly under estimate the
[sage-devel] Re: Project
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 8:12 AM, William Stein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 5:32 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 2:39 AM, mabshoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Apr 22, 9:15 am, Alfredo Portes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 1:41 AM, mabshoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi, Well, I think NAG chose the non-commercial only license on purpose. We have discussed the issue here before and everybody agrees that it is GPL incompatible. But I have little hope that Sage's potential interest in Aldor would get somebody to change the license. A non- commercial only Open Source license is often the kiss of death to a project. Abandoned by its commercial parent company, but not free in reality it is neither here nor there. Either you make the code free [your choice: GPL, LGPL, MIT, BSD] or you don't. It is either Open Source code or it isn't, just like you can't be a little big pregnant :) Yes, just like QT...oh wait. Well, I don't think the situation is comparable. TrollTech understood Open Source way back. Axiom was released under BSD, so why the different treatment for Aldor? From the little I know, the situation -- as it has been carefully explained to me -- is far more complicated, and I'm not sure it is one that can be resolved by emails. All I can say is that there really are good guys at NAG who would not like to see Axiom die (as it was) and they did the best to make it open source under a very liberal license (no poison). The surrounding environment and conditions for releasing Aldor had changed from what they were back when Axiom was released. I would recommend you talk to Mike Dewar, Stephen Watt, Barry Trager (among others) about the situation. However, I doubt it can be resolved by public emails -- and if it is resolved by public emails, then that is fantastic!. I can imagine.Is the conclusion to draw from the above that you think it unlikely Aldor will be released under a standard open source license in the near future, but that you very much wish it would be? Stephen Watt has indicated, at many times, that he is very willing to clarify the Aldor license terms -- I believe he intends to write a sort of FAQ that would shed light on the issue. I can imagine that the voice of a big player (Sage) is not the same as that of a small group (Axiom community at the time); so it might be that Sage could be more persuasive; but I suspect it would take lot of face-to-face conversions. At ISSAC'08, you'd very likely to meet people would shaped the development and release of Axiom and Aldor. However, unless there is a new player with new material in the discussion, I would not expect the situation to change. A petition to really open source Aldor won't hurt I think. What is the worst that can happen? Yes, I know the answer go and start one :-( Out of curiosity: Are there download statistics of Aldor binaries and source? Is there any kind of estimate of user numbers? How far along is FriCAS and/or OpenAxiom from using pure Aldor and no lisp? Are there any benchmarks to compare those two? Because of licensing issues -- OpenAxiom is released under BSD license -- and dependency problems, I cannot make OpenAxiom purely depending on Aldor. Whoever, it should be possible to call Aldor libraries from OpenAxiom and vice versa (and if that does not work, it is likely a bug in OpenAxiom). You didn't answer the questions about downloads/users/etc. Sorry about that -- I did not have enough coffee :-) Download: The numbers I have are the ones from SF website. When I ask for the raw number for the last two months ( Feb 23, 2008 - Apr 22, 2008), it says 685 downloads. I see a peak at 34 yesterday (I have no clue about what was going on yesterday). http://sourceforge.net/project/stats/detail.php?group_id=203172ugn=open-axiomtype=prdownload The Windows binary is said to have been downloaded 319 times but Alfredo and I know that the actual numbers are higher than that because the count was reset when the binary file was upgraded. The source tarball has been downloaded 133 times. Combined, the RPMs have been downloaded 78 times. Users: I have no numbers, except extrapolating from downloads and people sending me emails. Should we write to NAG to ask? Yes, that is a very good initiative. Mike Dewar is among the NAG people you might want to talk to. As I have stated many times, and part of the reasons for OpenAxiom, I would like to get away from Lisp as soon as possible: This isn't negociable. For people in Sage-devel who don't know, OpenAxiom has the following goal
[sage-devel] Re: Project
mabshoff wrote: Well, since the Maxima folks now have told us that they will support ecls soon the decision has been made on our end to switch to Maxima +ecls. Michael, I don't mean to rain on the parade, but: I personally am willing to try to resolve the problems compiling Maxima with ECLS, but I can't promise that anyone else is going to be interested. There is no point in beating the dead horse that is gcl. It has been proposed more than once on the Maxima mailing list to drop GCL. The main issue is that GCL runs on Windows and some other Lisps of interest (SBCL, CMUCL) do not. Robert Dodier --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Project
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 6:50 AM, Bill Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Michael, Wow, it sure it nice to have someone on the other end of the phone, so as to speak ... :-) I think it is really great that Google came through with financial support that is making it possible for you and others to dedicate so much time to this. I'm very thankful to them. By the way, Microsoft Research is also funding Sage work right now, and I'm also very grateful to them. On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 2:41 AM, mabshoff wrote: On Apr 22, 7:36 am, Bill Page wrote: ... The most recent branch 'Version_2_6_8pre' is what we normally use to build Axiom. There is a change about 4 months old. If I recall correctly 'Version_2_6_8pre' actually corresponds to the version distributed on Debian and would probably be the most likely to be stable on the largest number of platforms. At least testing ships CVS head. Are you sure? I suppose that we had better check with Camm. Please do. And not to be too picky here: The last tarball from the website predates OSX 10.5 and also Solaris 10, so maybe it is time to cut another bug fix release since everybody seems to be using 2.6.8CVS anyway. Yes, 2.6.8pre (as in pre-release). 2.6.8 was never officially released. But when I build stable releases I do not poke around in the CVS repo. Asking could have helped, but if nobody bothered to update the website in three years anyway what is the point? 2.6.7 actually also miserably fails on Solaris 9 for me, and that has been out for a while before 2.6.7. This is open source age and GCL existed well before that. I am not making excuses but ... GCL started in 1984 I guess. ... Well, since the Maxima folks now have told us that they will support ecls soon the decision has been made on our end to switch to Maxima +ecls. Choose your own poison. ;-) Actually I don't know much about ecl but I seriously doubt the long term viability of ecl will be any different than the half dozen other alternatives. Perhaps you should know more about ecl before you make such assertions. I also don't know much about ecl, but I do know that Michael Abshoff knows how to evaluate code and build systems well, and if he says that ecls is much more viable codewise I wouldn't try to refute it by simply saying I seriously doubt it without a good argument. Michael did give real technical arguments for ecls. Aside: Several very successful senior industry-type people have mentioned to me on several occasions that successful software projects tends to have a life cycle, which is maybe around 30 years. I do not know if I believe this, but their reasoning goes that software does something like this: Years 0-9: rapid growth of new project by a bunch of smart kids Years 10-19: stability; usability Years 20-29: decline GCL is from 1984. I'm still not at all sure I buy into this 30 year lifecycle deal, but there is probably something to it. Perhaps the only way to escape it is to reinvent the software -- e.g., Cayley which started in 1973, was reinvented as Magma in the early 1990s. Maybe Magma is being reinvented as Sage... :-) Of course I am all for co-operation between projects so if Maxima is willing to make a version that is more suitable for use in Sage, the more power (money and resources ...) to them! :-) Good. There is no point in beating the dead horse that is gcl. I take offense. gcl is not a dead horse no matter how neglected it might look to you. ecls has MSVC support *today* and is probably trivially to port to Sun Forte if it doesn't run already. The mailing list is alive and well. I have looked at the code and fixed some issues myself, so why would I want to touch gcl? I don't know. The OpenAxiom and FriCAS forks of Axiom work on ecl so I am also not too worried about gcl in the long run. --- Anyway, none of this solves the immediate problem of providing support for symbolic mathematics in Sage without adding the burden of supporting Lisp in all target environments. Right now you depend on the linkage with Maxima for this feature, And I think you see symbolic manipulation as a particular domain or mode of computation within Sage rather than the reason d'etre of computer algebra systems. I would like to argue however that from an overall design perspective Axiom is a better match for Sage than Maxima. Like Sage itself, the Axiom library is built-up in a (more or less) rigorous manner from more fundamental mathematical constructions. One of these complex constructions is called 'Expression'. This is the domain in which most symbolic calculations are done in Axiom. However as it will be in Sage, it is necessary that Expression interact in a well-defined manner with other Axiom domains of
[sage-devel] Re: Project
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 9:35 AM, Robert Dodier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There is no point in beating the dead horse that is gcl. It has been proposed more than once on the Maxima mailing list to drop GCL. The main issue is that GCL runs on Windows and some other Lisps of interest (SBCL, CMUCL) do not. Yes, that is a strong argument. See http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_name=877ifavq4r.fsf%40cantab.net -- Gaby --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.0 is out
mabshoff wrote: Hello folks, Sage 3.0 has been released on April 21st, 2008. It is available at http://sagemath.org/download.html * About Sage (http://www.sagemath.org) Fedora 7, 32 bits: -- The following tests failed: sage -t devel/sage/sage/server/simple/twist.py Total time for all tests: 2.1 seconds Jaap --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.0 is out
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 8:04 AM, Jaap Spies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: mabshoff wrote: Hello folks, Sage 3.0 has been released on April 21st, 2008. It is available at http://sagemath.org/download.html * About Sage (http://www.sagemath.org) Fedora 7, 32 bits: -- The following tests failed: sage -t devel/sage/sage/server/simple/twist.py Total time for all tests: 2.1 seconds Please do sage: hg_sage.pull() then sage -br and try that test again. William --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.0 is out
William Stein wrote: On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 8:04 AM, Jaap Spies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: mabshoff wrote: Hello folks, Sage 3.0 has been released on April 21st, 2008. It is available at http://sagemath.org/download.html * About Sage (http://www.sagemath.org) Fedora 7, 32 bits: -- The following tests failed: sage -t devel/sage/sage/server/simple/twist.py Total time for all tests: 2.1 seconds Please do sage: hg_sage.pull() then sage -br and try that test again. [EMAIL PROTECTED] sage-3.0]$ ./sage -t devel/sage/sage/server/simple/twist.py sage -t devel/sage/sage/server/simple/twist.py [9.4 s] -- All tests passed! Total time for all tests: 9.4 seconds [EMAIL PROTECTED] sage-3.0]$ Jaap --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Compile Error
Well, not to belabor the point but I just compiled 3.0 and it worked like a charm. Thanks for the fix! --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.0 is out
William Stein wrote: Please do sage: hg_sage.pull() then sage -br and try that test again Something strange was going on with the notebook(), but after hg_sage.pull() and ./sage -br the notebook starts in Firefox. The problem I have reported in trac #2935 is still there. But when I start firefox by hand https://localhost:8001/ everything seems to work! Jaap --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.0 is out
Sage 3.0 build failed. See: http://daly.axiom-developer.org/sagelog.html --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.0 is out
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 8:51 AM, Jaap Spies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: William Stein wrote: Please do sage: hg_sage.pull() then sage -br and try that test again Something strange was going on with the notebook(), but after hg_sage.pull() and ./sage -br the notebook starts in Firefox. The first test 3.0 release had a problem related to the ntoebook. That was a tiny fix which hg_sage.pull() fixes. Anybody who upgrades from now on automatically will have that fix. The problem I have reported in trac #2935 is still there. Yep, because neither Tom nor I have been able to replicate that problem, so we can't fix it. When we figure out how to replicate it, we'll fix it. But when I start firefox by hand https://localhost:8001/ everything seems to work! Yeah. Jaap -- William Stein Associate Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.0 is out
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 10:10 AM, root [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sage 3.0 build failed. See: http://daly.axiom-developer.org/sagelog.html You have to use a c99 compliant compiler. You're using gcc-3.2.2 which isn't C99 compliant. Please use a modern compiler (anything newer than gcc-3.4 might work). William --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.0 is out
On Apr 22, 6:00 pm, William Stein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 10:10 AM, root [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sage 3.0 build failed. See: http://daly.axiom-developer.org/sagelog.html You have to use a c99 compliant compiler. You're using gcc-3.2.2 which isn't C99 compliant. Please use a modern compiler (anything newer than gcc-3.4 might work). 3.4.6 also works well. But due to this I will finally put the compiler check right at the start of building Sage so it errors out gracefully right away. William Cheers, Michael --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Compilation using CC and CXX
Ideally, it would be nice to (e.g)
export CC=gcc-4.3
export CXX=g++-4.3
export F77=gfortran-4.3
then build sage, and have it *consistently* use the compilers as set
in the environment variables. This doesn't quite work, because at some
points the compilation just ignores the env variables. Below there is
a list of the obstructions I found for this to work.
Gonzalo
A) sage-spkg itself, for logging, calls gcc -v, instead of ${CC-gcc} -v.
Easy fix:
---
--- a/sage-spkg Mon Apr 21 01:43:53 2008 -0700
+++ b/sage-spkg Tue Apr 22 12:37:48 2008 -0300
@@ -241,8 +241,8 @@
echo
echo GCC Version
-echo gcc -v
-gcc -v
+echo ${CC-gcc} -v
+${CC-gcc} -v
if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then
echo Unable to determine gcc version.
fi
---
B) sage-env, tests if CC is gcc, which means CC=gcc-4.3 might not
work exactly the same as if gcc is a symlink to gcc-4.3, for instance:
if [ $SAGE64 = yes -a CC = gcc ]; then
CFLAGS=$CFLAGS -m64
fi
C) packages which seem to not honor CC environment variable (they use gcc):
flint-1.06.p2
atlas-3.8.1.p1
f2c-20070816.p0
symmetrica-2.0.p2
polybori-0.3.1.p1
rubiks-20070912.p5
zn_poly-0.8.p0
sage-3.0.rc1
gap-4.4.10.p7 // guava3.4
tachyon-0.98beta.p5
palp-1.1.p1
(gap itself uses CC, but compilation of guava, which is part of gap
spkg, does not).
D) packages which seem not to honor CXX environment variable (they use g++)
polybori-0.3.1.p1
rubiks-20070912.p5
sage-3.0.rc1
gfan-0.3.p3
flintqs-20070817.p3
E) fortran
Just for the record, a lot of configure scripts seem to check for
fortran, even if they don't use it. It appears the relevant
environment variables are F77 and FFLAGS. Anyway, the variable
SAGE_FORTRAN seems to be honored fine for the packages that actually
need fortran.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Compilation using CC and CXX
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 9:19 AM, Gonzalo Tornaria
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ideally, it would be nice to (e.g)
export CC=gcc-4.3
export CXX=g++-4.3
export F77=gfortran-4.3
I agree. That was always the intention. I'm glad you've gone
through and tested what does and doesn't obey this.
Probably the best thing to do is to make a trac tickets
for each issue, then fix them one by one.
William
then build sage, and have it *consistently* use the compilers as set
in the environment variables. This doesn't quite work, because at some
points the compilation just ignores the env variables. Below there is
a list of the obstructions I found for this to work.
Gonzalo
A) sage-spkg itself, for logging, calls gcc -v, instead of ${CC-gcc} -v.
Easy fix:
---
--- a/sage-spkg Mon Apr 21 01:43:53 2008 -0700
+++ b/sage-spkg Tue Apr 22 12:37:48 2008 -0300
@@ -241,8 +241,8 @@
echo
echo GCC Version
-echo gcc -v
-gcc -v
+echo ${CC-gcc} -v
+${CC-gcc} -v
if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then
echo Unable to determine gcc version.
fi
---
B) sage-env, tests if CC is gcc, which means CC=gcc-4.3 might not
work exactly the same as if gcc is a symlink to gcc-4.3, for instance:
if [ $SAGE64 = yes -a CC = gcc ]; then
CFLAGS=$CFLAGS -m64
fi
C) packages which seem to not honor CC environment variable (they use gcc):
flint-1.06.p2
atlas-3.8.1.p1
f2c-20070816.p0
symmetrica-2.0.p2
polybori-0.3.1.p1
rubiks-20070912.p5
zn_poly-0.8.p0
sage-3.0.rc1
gap-4.4.10.p7 // guava3.4
tachyon-0.98beta.p5
palp-1.1.p1
(gap itself uses CC, but compilation of guava, which is part of gap
spkg, does not).
D) packages which seem not to honor CXX environment variable (they use g++)
polybori-0.3.1.p1
rubiks-20070912.p5
sage-3.0.rc1
gfan-0.3.p3
flintqs-20070817.p3
E) fortran
Just for the record, a lot of configure scripts seem to check for
fortran, even if they don't use it. It appears the relevant
environment variables are F77 and FFLAGS. Anyway, the variable
SAGE_FORTRAN seems to be honored fine for the packages that actually
need fortran.
--
William Stein
Associate Professor of Mathematics
University of Washington
http://wstein.org
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Project
..snip... If the lisp community were alive and well their tools would be alive and well. That is clearly not the case of gcl and clisp certainly has some serious issues to deal with with newer gcc releases as well as compilers not gcc. I'm also on the clisp mailing list and I don't recall seeing any sage-related bug reports there either. Can gcl be improved? Certainly. But I am not holding my breath. ..snip... I know you don't care about lisp and that's fine. And I know you've encountered problems with lisp builds. And we both know that when someone encounters problems with open source tools it is expected behavior to post bug reports (as I did with Sage this morning). Please post specific bug reports. We all know that's the only real way anything will get done to solve the problems. The clisp maintainers are very responsive to mailing list bug reports. Tim --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Project
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 4:25 PM, root [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know you don't care about lisp and that's fine. And I know you've encountered problems with lisp builds. And we both know that when someone encounters problems with open source tools it is expected behavior to post bug reports August 08, 2007 http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gcl-devel/2007-08/msg4.html August 19, 2007: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gcl-devel/2007-08/msg00017.html No answer, no acknowledgment. If I'm reading `date` output correctly, today is April 22, 2008. How long do you think Don Winieki -- who is *begging* to contribute to GCL -- should wait till he gets an answer to this basic question: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gcl-devel/2008-04/msg4.html http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gcl-devel/2008-02/msg4.html -- Gaby --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Project
On Apr 22, 11:25 pm, root [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Tim, ..snip... If the lisp community were alive and well their tools would be alive and well. That is clearly not the case of gcl and clisp certainly has some serious issues to deal with with newer gcc releases as well as compilers not gcc. I'm also on the clisp mailing list and I don't recall seeing any sage-related bug reports there either. Two examples I could find in my local mail archive [I have more, but not all my email that I send is stored locally and searchable]: * clisp 2.43 Solaris 9 build failure 11/09/2007 * clisp.run 2.41 segfaults on Solaris 9 in 32 bit mode 08/18/2007 I send more emails about two two months ago, but much of that traffic was off-list to Sam directly with William in the CC. Sam has an account on one of William's Solaris boxen, so he can't claim that he doesn't have access. The gcc 4.2 and 4.3 issues are well documented in clisp's sf bugtracker. The report originally was by cartman, which used to hang around in #sage-devel. I have also commented on various ticket at clisp's sf based bug tracker. So I would say I have met the burden of being involved and attempted to fix things. Can gcl be improved? Certainly. But I am not holding my breath. ..snip... I know you don't care about lisp and that's fine. And I know you've encountered problems with lisp builds. And we both know that when someone encounters problems with open source tools it is expected behavior to post bug reports (as I did with Sage this morning). Yes. Your feedback is certainly appreciated and I will fix the bug you reported in 3.0.1. The README.txt says that the minimal supported version of gcc is 3.4 and when building FLINT [later on after eclib] it will error out telling you that you need a C99 compiler. We will move that test to the start of the Sage build process so the error will not happen. Please post specific bug reports. We all know that's the only real way anything will get done to solve the problems. The clisp maintainers are very responsive to mailing list bug reports. Yes, they are, but they haven't solved the problem. Re gcc 4.2+4.3 it boils down to: We know it miscompiles, it is likely a bug in gcc, so if you figure out what is wrong let us know. Well, after 6+ months I decided that enough is enought [and I looked at their code to get it to compile with Sun Forte's cc or CC] and we are building the code with -O0 to avoid hitting that bug. But even -O0 doesn't help on Solaris for example. The last working clisp on Solaris is 2.39 compiled with gcc 3.3 on Solaris 8. I got it to run as a binary by tricking it [it wants readline.so.4, but causes it to segfault, so linking readline.so.5 to readline.so.4 and manipulating LD_LIBRARY_PATH for clisp does the trick]. I feel that I have done more than a reasonable amount of work here. Do you agree or disagree? Tim Cheers, Michael --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Compilation using CC and CXX
Hi there, I've added patch suggestions for PolyBoRi to the Tracs: http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/2999 http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/3000 BTW, I would have preferred to have tickets per package not per variable. This way, the names for the patch files will be very long, as they have to identify the package as well. Best regards, Alexander --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Project
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 3:25 PM, mabshoff wrote: I googled for it and it seems lenny is using 2.6.7 while sid is using 2.6.7-36.1. So I might have gotten my wires crossed with unstable here. So my bad. Beware of the release numbering. The most recent reference I could find is: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gcl-devel/2008-01/msg2.html 2.6.8pre by contrast is nearer at hand. I do think we will need a windows installer for this release. I'd also like a working mac intel port. Otherwise, the image (packaged as Debian gcl-2.6.7-36) is carrying axiom, maxima, acl2, and hol88 to all 12 Debian platforms. So I guess as of January this year Debian 2.6.7-36.1 was actually 2.6.8pre in cvs. But it still raises the point that the website should either have snap shots or a pointer to the Debian page. I know that Camm is heavily involved with Debian, so I knew where to look after the 2.7CVS failed for me the first time I checked it eight months or so ago. Yes it would be nice to have accurate up to date information at the gcl website. Maybe a wiki would be nice but it still takes someone with time and motivation. ... Well, I think NAG chose the non-commercial only license on purpose. Well yes, of course it was on purpose. They have stated that they felt obligated to do this by the terms under which they originally received Axiom (and Aldor) from IBM. Odd, IBM as a whole seems to be very OS friendly, but in reality it somewhat depends on the unit you deal with. I also suspect that if it were possible to approach IBM about the license situation with Axiom and Aldor now, one might obtain a different picture than the one presented by NAG. But NAG's relationship with IBM was circa 1995 and this is now. Different people are involved. NAG itself is a non-commerical organization. Well, be that as it may, but their numerical library isn't free. Therein lies the rub. Originally, acquiring Axiom was a way for NAG to package and market it's numerical library. They did a *lot* of work to link Axiom to the numerical library - all of which was lost in the open source version of Axiom. When the numerical library was licensed to Maple circa 2000, NAG found themselves in a bit of a conflicted position. ... Nope, I am fully aware of the power of Sage. But let's get $FOO into Sage is not the solution and will not magically make a project better. It seems to me that my proposal for the place that Axiom/Aldor could have in Sage has more depth to it than that... :-( ... Regards, Bill Page. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Compilation using CC and CXX
On 4/22/08, William Stein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: export CC=gcc-4.3 export CXX=g++-4.3 Gonzalo -- just out of curiosity are you willing to do all the work to fix the issues with CC not being honored? Or are you just saying I think it should be this way; you guys should fix it? My suggestion that you make tickets for this was based on the former rather than the latter. I was hoping the packages would fix themselves... :-) Seriously, I would never say you guys should fix it... But having a list of packages which ignore CC and/or CXX might be the first step for that to be solved. To focus on the real issues, I see two: A) Setting CC and CXX before compiling sage, currently has the effect that some packages are compiled using gcc and some using $CC, etc. I don't know if this might have bad consequences for the install. B) How to choose compilers. A valid case (IMHO) is where one has gcc - gcc-4.1 system-wide, but wants to compile with gcc-4.3. The proposed way is to make symlinks of these as gcc and g++ earlier in the PATH. One way to fix (A) would be to have sage-spkg unset CC and CXX variables, leading to consistency (and warn the user!), but also blocking a solution to (B). One way to fix (B) and (A) is to fix all packages (including sage-scripts) to honor CC and CXX variables, this was my proposed solution. At least you could have a policy for new spkgs to honor some variables, and fix old ones with time. Another way to fix (B) would be to do the same trick as done with fortran, e.g. have sage-spkg honor SAGE_CC and SAGE_CXX by creating symlinks or scripts (but this still needs fixing packages to use the scripts, unless you are willing to call the scripts gcc and g++). I wonder if it would make sense to have compiler spec files (say, like in Qt), where some variables are defined, like CC, CXX, and also CFLAGS, etc. and making sure all packages honor this spec. This probably allows for greatest flexibility, (e.g. I can edit the gcc.spec file to set CC=gcc-4.3 and CXX=g++-4.3, and if I *really* know what I am doing, even change CFLAGS). And I guess it will be useful to support different compilers (sun forte, msvc, etc) which will presumaly need different CFLAGS, etc. It seems to me that something like that is actually done in sage-env in an ad-hoc way. Gonzalo --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Project
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 11:32 PM, Bill Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 3:25 PM, mabshoff wrote: I googled for it and it seems lenny is using 2.6.7 while sid is using 2.6.7-36.1. So I might have gotten my wires crossed with unstable here. So my bad. Beware of the release numbering. The most recent reference I could find is: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gcl-devel/2008-01/msg2.html 2.6.8pre by contrast is nearer at hand. I do think we will need a windows installer for this release. I'd also like a working mac intel port. Otherwise, the image (packaged as Debian gcl-2.6.7-36) is carrying axiom, maxima, acl2, and hol88 to all 12 Debian platforms. So I guess as of January this year Debian 2.6.7-36.1 was actually 2.6.8pre in cvs. Just for the record -- I looked at the source package of gcl 2.6.7-36.1 a couple days ago, and it's a big mess. The orig.tar.gz is smaller than the debian.diff, that patches nearly every file. Also the debian/ directory contains garbage like this: $ ls debian/.#* debian/.#changelog.1.220.2.1.4.1.2.1.2.1.2.2.2.1.2.19.2.207.2.23.2.11.2.14.2.13.4.7.2.22.2.97 debian/.#control..1.2.2.1.2.5.6.1.2.1.2.3.2.8 debian/.#control.1.35.4.1.4.5.6.1.2.1.2.5.2.8 debian/.#control.cvs.1.1.2.1.2.5.6.1.2.1.2.3.2.8 debian/.#rules.1.41.4.2.2.7.4.1.2.1.2.2.2.1.2.8 But that's minor. Well, I am glad I don't have to touch and maintain such a thing. Ondrej --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Project
I feel that I have done more than a reasonable amount of work here. Do you agree or disagree? Have you done a reasonable amount of work? That's for you to judge since you're the person with the need. But lets see what seems to be going on with Clisp. Sam's reply to you seems to be that you need a certain combination of operating systems and compilers and libraries to generate a supported build. (This is very similar to the reply to my Sage bug report, essentially fix your compiler.) So the expected response would be for you to reinstall Solaris to the correct version with the correct libraries and the bug goes away. Asking a user to fix their system is not a valid response but that seems to be the essence of the replies. Ask yourself why you might get this kind of response. Sam (and Camm) may have time constraints. I know that Camm does the work in his free time. I know Camm is working on a massive rewrite (probably NOT in public). I don't know what Sam does for a living but I suspect his work is also a free time activity. Axiom is also free time support. Dormant bug reports are not an indication of inactivity. Sage may have a few bug reports that are a few months old. Clisp is free software. You have the source code, you have the need, post a patch. Sam (and Camm) may have hardware/operating system constraints. Possibly the boxen that they use are borrowed and they cannot reproduce your exact environment. I have 9 physical machines here with 32 virtual boxen and I still cannot reproduce all of the combinations. I don't have access to a Sparc, for instance. Sourceforge took down their compile farm and HP doesn't have a large set in their farm. Axiom runs in many more places than I publish but there are outstanding build issues so I won't claim it runs anywhere but on a published subset of combinations. You do the same thing (e.g. no redhat9 gcc x.x.x). I did ask Google, Microsoft, and Sourceforge to put up compile farms but nothing happened. If we all used a standard compile farm this problem might be minimized. For now, though, the odds are good that Sam does not have your Solaris machine configuration and cannot reproduce your bug. We are both in the same business; you package Sage to run everywhere and I package Axiom to run everywhere. As soon as you touch anything at all, something breaks. When GCL breaks, I post a patch and locally apply the patch until it is accepted upstream (if at all). If Clisp fails for you then fix it, post a patch, locally apply the patch until it gets applied upstream, and move on. It is not a question of reasonable amount of work. It is a question of expectations. What, exactly, do you expect? Instant, top-of-the-pile bug fixes on all of YOUR hardware/software combinations? This is free and open source software. The only thing you can expect is to get the source code so you can fix it and post a patch. Everything else is not in the contract. That's why people pay for software. Franz would be willing to fix your issues immediately. I'm not sure your check to Sam has cleared yet. If you don't want to build patches then send Sam a contract. I'm sure he'd be happy to get paid. Sage will have this same problem in the future as various package maintainers move on or you can no longer reach your Sparc. What if your expectations are not fulfilled? Well, that generally leads to anger and frustration, both natural reactions. But it seems that you have used hasty generalization to conclude that Lisp is dead. And from there to conclude that Lisp should be removed from everywhere. That's a shame because Maxima contains an astonishing amount of well debugged algorithms by recognized experts in the field. And characterizing Lisps like SBCL (fork of CMUCL, child of the CMU Spice Lisp research project) as polishing a turd, implies that Scott Fahlman wasted his time studying dynamic language optimization in compilers. Python has yet to even think about these issues, most of which have already been solved by Scott. Everywhere else in Sage I see people struggle over milliseconds. Then I see Maxima built on Clisp (an interpreter) rather than SBCL, a optimizing compiler. Ultimately the point of my post was that, despite not seeing immediate results, it is STILL worthwhile to post bug reports. At minimum, other people can google them and find that they also have the problem. As for your original question, if your bug reports contain a patch THEN you've done a reasonable amount of work, at least by my definition of reasonable. Your definition might differ. Tim --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Project
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 6:50 PM, mabshoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't want this discussion to go out of hand [too late], but ultimately this is all about what is best for the Sage project. And my opinion there counts a whole lot more in that regard than yours, just as my opinion about Axiom is totally irrelevant. Michael -- Don't worry too much about being distracted by Tim. Just providing data as you have been doing so well is sufficient for us to form opinion. Please keep the good work up. And certainly, I value your opinion about CASs for the Axiom family. -- Gaby --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Project
On Apr 23, 1:58 am, Gabriel Dos Reis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 6:50 PM, mabshoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't want this discussion to go out of hand [too late], but ultimately this is all about what is best for the Sage project. And my opinion there counts a whole lot more in that regard than yours, just as my opinion about Axiom is totally irrelevant. Michael -- Gaby, Don't worry too much about being distracted by Tim. Just providing data as you have been doing so well is sufficient for us to form opinion. Please keep the good work up. And certainly, I value your opinion about CASs for the Axiom family. Well, since I have no stake over in the Axiom family because I do not contribute code I meant to say that Tim is free to ignore my opinion. I certainly have an opinion on Axiom, but this thread is loaded enough that I do not need to pour gasoline in the flames ;) But it is important to me that sage-devel is a forum where each voice is heard and while I fundamentally disagree with Tim I greatly prefer him to be around. This forum should not be some cult like thing where we all tell each other how great we are and that William walks on water. I am rude, opinionated and I state my opinion honestly. I have been wrong, very wrong, very, very wrong and will be wrong again in the future, but in that case I am the first to call myself an idiot in public. Tim might be right 99% of the time, but he fights for his ideas as fiercely even for the 1% where he might be wrong. So, in the end I might owe Tim an apology on some of the things where he is right, but in my point of view he is wrong about lisp and also wrong about literate programming. This is a free country [planet :)], so both of us are free to follow up on their own opinion. I am sure Sage will succeed, which is all that matters to me. What is also important is that in sage-devel technical reasons trumps all else, i.e. just because you are are reputable, widely respected person in the mathematical world expect no lenience from me if I think you are wrong. In mathematics you are either wrong or right - we don't have that luxury in programming, hence we have discussions like this. I immensely enjoy those, but I am getting back to work on Sage 3.0.1 now. :=) -- Gaby Cheers, Michael --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Sage 3.0 notebook fails to display
On a clean build (see specs below) (log is at http://daly.axiom-developer.org/install.log) ./sage sage: notebook() on Fedora 8 86_64 on processor : 0 vendor_id : AuthenticAMD cpu family : 15 model : 104 model name : AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual-Core Processor TK-57 stepping: 2 cpu MHz : 1900.113 cache size : 256 KB fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 1 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt rdtscp lm 3dnowext 3dnow up rep_good pni cx16 lahf_lm extapic misalignsse bogomips: 3803.70 TLB size: 1024 4K pages clflush size: 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management: ts fid vid ttp tm stc 100mhzsteps this opens Firefox (version 2.0.0.8) to: https://:8000/?startup_token=(long hex string) and says Server not found tar -xf sage-3.0.tar [EMAIL PROTECTED] sage]# cd sage-3.0 [EMAIL PROTECTED] sage-3.0]# make cd spkg ./install all 21 | tee -a ../install.log make[1]: Entering directory `/space/sage/sage-3.0/spkg' . Host system uname -a: Linux localhost.localdomain 2.6.23.1-42.fc8 #1 SMP Tue Oct 30 13:18:33 EDT 2007 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux GCC Version gcc -v Using built-in specs. Target: x86_64-redhat-linux Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man --infodir=/usr/share/info --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix --enable-checking=release --with-system-zlib --enable-__cxa_atexit --disable-libunwind-exceptions --enable-languages=c,c++,objc,obj-c++,java,fortran,ada --enable-java-awt=gtk --disable-dssi --enable-plugin --with-java-home=/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.5.0-gcj-1.5.0.0/jre --enable-libgcj-multifile --enable-java-maintainer-mode --with-ecj-jar=/usr/share/java/eclipse-ecj.jar --with-cpu=generic --host=x86_64-redhat-linux Thread model: posix gcc version 4.1.2 20070925 (Red Hat 4.1.2-33) I tried sage: hg_sage.pull() sage: hg_sage.update() sage: hg_sage.merge() but it says there is nothing to merge. Tim --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.0 notebook fails to display
sage -b solved it. thanks --Tim --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
