[sage-support] Re: Sage 2.10 released!
On Jan 19, 5:36 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED] dortmund.de> wrote: > Hello folks, > > Sage 2.10 has been released on January 18th, 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, sage-support, > sage-forum or sage-newbie. You can also drop by in #sage-devel in > freenode. > > - > > We did not achieve all the goals we had set ourselves for Sage 2.10 > and also decided to release slightly before the planned date. The > reason was one hand the much better than expected stability of > 2.10.alpha4 [it build and tested perfectly on all out test platforms] > and on the other hand the need to have a stable release for Bug Day 9 > planned for this Saturday. > > The following people contributed to this release: > > * Michael Abshoff > * Martin Albrecht > * Bill Allombert * Benjamin Antieau > * Robert Bradshaw > * Craig Citro > * Francis Clarke > * Burcin Erocal > * Alex Ghitza > * Jason Grout > * Peter Jipsen > * David Joyner > * Mike Hansen > * Bill Hart > * David Harvey > * Josh Kantor > * Kiran Kedlaya > * David Kohel > * Ted Kosan > * Willem Jan Palenstijn > * Robert Miller > * Bobby Moretti > * Rich Morin > * Minh Nguyen > * Jaap Spies > * William Stein > * Carl Witty > * Paul Zimmermann > > Cheers, > > Michael Abshoff (release chair), William Stein > > * Major Features, New Spkgs and Bugfixes > > * Python is now built with ucs4 > * FLINT was updated to the 1.0.5 release > * Many bug fixes and also a couple of memory leak fixes > * Integrate a fix to the mpfr library so we no longer smash >the stack with high precisions > * Fix a long standing, hard to hit bug in the maxima interface > > * Known Issues with 2.10: > > * The mpfr fix for smashing the stack causes speed regressions, >especially for multiplications. This ought to be fixed for the >upcoming mpfr 2.3.1 release. > * Any non-standard Python packages that build native components >need to be rebuilt due to the switch from ucs2 to ucs4 > > We closed 83 tickets. For details see > >http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/milestone/sage-2.10 > > * Upcoming Releases > > The next release will be 2.10.1, chaired by Michael Abshoff. The > release > is planned for the 25th of January, 2008. Potential features include: > > * OSX 10.5 support in 64 bit mode [this will depend on fixing >a vexing segfault in libSingular and getting disutils to >play nice with numpy] > * gcc 4.3 support [depends on the update to eclib.spkg] > * FreeBSD support out of the box > > * Doctesting Coverage > > For 2.9.3 we had: > Overall weighted coverage score: 35.2% > Total number of functions: 18100 > > We increased coverage by 0.2% in 2.10 while adding 196 extra > functions: > Overall weighted coverage score: 35.4% > Total number of functions: 18296 > > * Closed Tickets: > > Merged in alpha4: > > #1266: Mike Hansen: sage.functions.piecewise is missing from >reference manual > #1289: Mike Hansen: serious problems with how ceil and floor > #1640: Alex Ghitza: missing documentation Elliptic Curve for >heegner_discriminants > #1705: Martin Albrecht: factorization of polynomials over >non-prime finite fields is TOTALLY BROKEN in Sage >[we now throw a not implemented error on this case and >will fix this once upstream, i.e. Singular fixes this] > #1727: Mike Hansen: truth value of inequalities not as expected > #1734: Robert Bradshaw, William Stein: variable jmol translucency > #1736: Alex Ghitza: sturm_bound() not working on spaces of cusp >forms #1745: Benjamin Antieau: bug in point enumeration mod p. The above patch was wrongly attributed to William, so this email should set the record straight. We take credit very seriously, so please inform us of any mistakes we make in the release notes. I have already updated the official release notes on the web. Once more apologies to Benjamin. Cheers, Michael > #1747: Martin Albrecht: speed improvement for >mq.SR.polynomial_system > #1774: Bill Allombert: potential very serious problems with >SEA and PARI-2.3.3 > #1783: Mike Hansen: fix latex errors with fraction field elements > #1786: Mike Hansen: coercion error with fraction field of >multivariate polynomials > #1788: Robert Bradshaw: cython annotation in notebook > #1790: Michael Abshoff: numerical noise doctest failure with >gcc 4.2.2/x86-64 > #1791: Michael Abshoff: numerical noise doctest failure with >gcc 4.2.2/x86 > #1797: Mike Hansen: add another doctest for expansion of >elementary symmetric functions > #1799: Carl Witty:
[sage-support] Re: SAGE at ISP etc
On Jan 19, 2008 8:44 PM, Timothy Clemans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The jsMath fonts are primarily important in the case of printing. You > don't need those fonts normally just to use jsMath in a web browser. > You don't absolutely _need_ them, but they make the mathematics look much much better. William > > On Jan 19, 8:26 pm, kks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have 2 questions: > > > >I happen to have lots of space on an ISP site which I administer. > > Is it possible to unarchive the sage package in the public_html folder > > and start sage with a .php script to host educational notebooks? > > > >I used to use Texmacs for the rendering of formulas generated by > > any of the softwares , including scilab. Why is it not possible to > > render formulaes ( I guess using TeX fonts ) as in Texmacs in Sage > > without the jsMath fonts? > > > > Thank you for your attention. > > > -- William Stein Associate Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@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-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: SAGE at ISP etc
The jsMath fonts are primarily important in the case of printing. You don't need those fonts normally just to use jsMath in a web browser. On Jan 19, 8:26 pm, kks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have 2 questions: > >I happen to have lots of space on an ISP site which I administer. > Is it possible to unarchive the sage package in the public_html folder > and start sage with a .php script to host educational notebooks? > >I used to use Texmacs for the rendering of formulas generated by > any of the softwares , including scilab. Why is it not possible to > render formulaes ( I guess using TeX fonts ) as in Texmacs in Sage > without the jsMath fonts? > > Thank you for your attention. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@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-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: SAGE at ISP etc
Hello, >I happen to have lots of space on an ISP site which I administer. > Is it possible to unarchive the sage package in the public_html folder > and start sage with a .php script to host educational notebooks? If you have shell acess on your ISP's machine than it's probably possible. >I used to use Texmacs for the rendering of formulas generated by > any of the softwares , including scilab. Why is it not possible to > render formulaes ( I guess using TeX fonts ) as in Texmacs in Sage > without the jsMath fonts? I wrote a TeXmacs plugin for Sage which should now be included in the latest version of TeXmacs. See http://wiki.sagemath.org/TeXmacs --Mike --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@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-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] SAGE at ISP etc
I have 2 questions: I happen to have lots of space on an ISP site which I administer. Is it possible to unarchive the sage package in the public_html folder and start sage with a .php script to host educational notebooks? I used to use Texmacs for the rendering of formulas generated by any of the softwares , including scilab. Why is it not possible to render formulaes ( I guess using TeX fonts ) as in Texmacs in Sage without the jsMath fonts? Thank you for your attention. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@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-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Elementary symmetric function expansion (bug?)
Hi, I'm using Sage 2.10 now. Expansion for elements in SFAElementary works great now, but there is another problem: the expansion lies in the wrong ring. sage: e=SFAElementary(QQ) sage: f=e([2]).expand(2) sage: f x0*x1 sage: f.parent() Multivariate Polynomial Ring in x0, x1, x2 over Rational Field The same code but for SFASchur results in: sage: s=SFASchur(QQ) sage: f=s([2]).expand(2) sage: f x0^2 + x0*x1 + x1^2 sage: f.parent() Multivariate Polynomial Ring in x0, x1 over Rational Field Thanks, BFJ On Jan 17, 1:46 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 17, 2008 10:44 AM, BFJ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Excellent, Thanks. As for my other question, the one about where to > > report things, whether to file bug reports, etc.., what is best? As > > I'm working on a Sage project related to my own research I'm finding > > occasional problems. Should I post them here or try to do something > > more official like using trac? > > Reporting them here is great. We'll immediately paste them to trac > once we verify the bugs. Once you report a few and get with the flow, > Michael Abshoff or I will create an account for you on trac (just write > to us off list). > > Welcome to Sage! > > > > > > > Thanks, > > BFJ > > > On Jan 16, 4:30pm, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > dortmund.de> wrote: > > > On Jan 16, 10:23 pm, BFJ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > First of all, I don't know whether to post about this here, or file a > > > > bug report, or something else. I'm new to community developed > > > > software. Let me know if this isn't the right place to report the > > > > following. > > > > > I'm using sage 2.9.2 and 2.9.3 on different (both PPC) machines, both > > > > running OS X 10.4. > > > > Consider the following commands which should expand an elementary > > > > symmetric function as a polynomial in 3 variables: > > > > > > > > Hi BJF, > > > > I can reproduce the problem with 2.9.3, but it is fixed in > > > 2.10.alpha3: > > > > -- > > > | SAGE Version 2.10.alpha3, Release Date: 2008-01-14 | > > > | Type notebook() for the GUI, and license() for information. | > > > -- > > > > sage: sage: k=SFAElementary(QQ) > > > sage: sage: f=k([2]) > > > sage: sage: f.expand(3) > > > x0*x1 + x0*x2 + x1*x2 > > > sage: > > > > Mike Hansen did post a patch that was merged early on in 2.10.alpha2 > > > or so. He might be able to tell you if the bug was fixed "on purpose" > > > or "by accident". 2.10 should be out by the weekend or maybe Monday. > > > Alpha3 is available at > > > >http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mabshoff/release-cycles-2.10/sag... > > > > Mike: could you add a doctest that tests this behavior? > > > > > Similar commands, but on objects from SFASchur, SFAPower, SFAMonomial, > > > > etc.., work perfectly. It seems to be only SFAElementary that has a > > > > problem. > > > > Thanks, > > > > > BFJ > > > > Cheers, > > > > Michael > > -- > William Stein > Associate Professor of Mathematics > University of Washingtonhttp://wstein.org --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@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-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: graphs(n) behavior under restriction
On Jan 19, 2008 5:48 PM, kcrisman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > The graphs(...) construction is naturally an iterator, so instead of
> > constructing a list, just iterate through them, saving the ones you
> > need. Try this:
> > sage: def check_size(g):
> > : return g.size() == 6
> > :
> > sage: L = []
> > sage: for g in graphs(7):
> > : if check_size(g):
> > : L.append(g)
> > :
> >
>
> Is there a difference in action between this and Jason's list
> comprehension construct below?
>
> sage: [g for g in graphs(3) if g.size()==3]
> [Graph on 3 vertices]
>
> That is, does his example construct just the generator and then append
> them to the list like yours, or does it construct the list first?
> Either yes or no will help my Python understanding.
His example constructs just the generators. The two are basically equivalent.
>
> But what I am really getting at is what David Joyner calls making Sage
> "insanely easy" to use. I had also considered defining extra
> functions to do this, but this just adds another layer of overhead;
> the 'filter' construction (and Jason's idea) are both at least ways to
> do it in a compact way, so there is the least needed change when
> checking something new.
>
> However, the idea is not just for me to have something that works, to
> show students, which I have done in some other classes (and had a lot
> of fun learning to program and parse Python on the way!), but to
> create something which the students, *particularly* the ones with no
> programming experience, can change themselves with as little pain as
> possible.
Ummh, I think that's what the "mathematica demonstrations" idea is all
about. We need to implement something similar in Sage, so people can
play around with graphs, etc., by manipulating buttons, sliders, and
very simple forms.
> Even with my own limited programming experience, I am
> constantly baffled by how scary algorithmic thinking is to students
> who create distractingly and annoyingly fancy Powerpoint presentations
> with aplomb - but you teach who you have. Probably 20 years ago it
> would have been the opposite - any computer-literate students would
> have been down with BASIC but mystified by a double-click.
>
> > > Even the syntax of the graphs_list.show_graphs(list) is pretty thorny
> > > and certainly nonintuitive compared to the rest of Sage graphics,
> >
> > Can you give an example of what you're talking about? Given any
> > arbitrary
> > list of Sage objects, the only obvious choice I can think of is the
> > GraphicsArray object, which usually wants a list of lists anyway. The
> > whole
> > reason we wrote the graphs_list set of functions was to make it easier
> > to
> > get nice plots of lists of graphs. It would be much easier for us to
> > make
> > you happy regarding this point if you could give us an example of
> > other
> > sage objects that act so nicely.
>
> Oh, I just meant as opposed to something like just typing show(list).
> Again, my standard concern is "insanely easy", and hence as consistent
> as possible. But I hadn't thought of the fact that these are of lists
> of graphics objects, since this is a different case than when one uses
> show(P+Q) or something, so I apologize for misinterpreting this; I
> believe you that there probably isn't a better way to do it! I'm
> sorry for it, and definitely didn't intend to be irksome.
Actually, the behavior of Sage for show(v), where v is a list of graphics
objects, is pretty stupid. This is pretty dumb:
sage: show([plot(sin,(0,1)), circle((0,0),1)])
\begin{array}{l}[\text{Graphics object
consisting of 1 graphics primitive},\\
\text{Graphics object consisting of 1 graphics primitive}],\\
\end{array}
It would be better to observe that each element of this list is a
graphics object
and in that case make a graphics arrow (or something!) out of it.
I would support adding that feature if you think it would be useful.
By the way,
sage: implicit_multiplication(True)
sage: 2x + 3cos(x)
3*cos(x) + 2*x
now works in sage-2.10. You might be interested, since you were one of the
people to request it.
>
> >
> > Finally, regarding efficiency, there are absolutely no guarantees. The
> > canonical labeling of graphs is somewhat competitive, but it still has
> > a ways to go to catch up, and it is currently going through a major
> > overhaul by yours truly. As far as generating graphs goes, you should
> > not expect it to be fast at all. All that is implemented right now is
> > in Python, all the property checks are in Python, and no optimizations
> > of any kind have been done. What needs to happen first is optimization
> > of the canonical labeling function.
>
> That is what I expected, but hopefully won't be too big a problem -
> the *nice* part about 'customers' needing insane ease is that they
> usually don't need insane speed!
Wow you have an extremely interesting point there. The "99% of people" who
just want something that is insa
[sage-support] Re: graphs(n) behavior under restriction
> The graphs(...) construction is naturally an iterator, so instead of > constructing a list, just iterate through them, saving the ones you > need. Try this: > sage: def check_size(g): > : return g.size() == 6 > : > sage: L = [] > sage: for g in graphs(7): > : if check_size(g): > : L.append(g) > : > Is there a difference in action between this and Jason's list comprehension construct below? sage: [g for g in graphs(3) if g.size()==3] [Graph on 3 vertices] That is, does his example construct just the generator and then append them to the list like yours, or does it construct the list first? Either yes or no will help my Python understanding. But what I am really getting at is what David Joyner calls making Sage "insanely easy" to use. I had also considered defining extra functions to do this, but this just adds another layer of overhead; the 'filter' construction (and Jason's idea) are both at least ways to do it in a compact way, so there is the least needed change when checking something new. However, the idea is not just for me to have something that works, to show students, which I have done in some other classes (and had a lot of fun learning to program and parse Python on the way!), but to create something which the students, *particularly* the ones with no programming experience, can change themselves with as little pain as possible. Even with my own limited programming experience, I am constantly baffled by how scary algorithmic thinking is to students who create distractingly and annoyingly fancy Powerpoint presentations with aplomb - but you teach who you have. Probably 20 years ago it would have been the opposite - any computer-literate students would have been down with BASIC but mystified by a double-click. > > Even the syntax of the graphs_list.show_graphs(list) is pretty thorny > > and certainly nonintuitive compared to the rest of Sage graphics, > > Can you give an example of what you're talking about? Given any > arbitrary > list of Sage objects, the only obvious choice I can think of is the > GraphicsArray object, which usually wants a list of lists anyway. The > whole > reason we wrote the graphs_list set of functions was to make it easier > to > get nice plots of lists of graphs. It would be much easier for us to > make > you happy regarding this point if you could give us an example of > other > sage objects that act so nicely. Oh, I just meant as opposed to something like just typing show(list). Again, my standard concern is "insanely easy", and hence as consistent as possible. But I hadn't thought of the fact that these are of lists of graphics objects, since this is a different case than when one uses show(P+Q) or something, so I apologize for misinterpreting this; I believe you that there probably isn't a better way to do it! I'm sorry for it, and definitely didn't intend to be irksome. > > Finally, regarding efficiency, there are absolutely no guarantees. The > canonical labeling of graphs is somewhat competitive, but it still has > a ways to go to catch up, and it is currently going through a major > overhaul by yours truly. As far as generating graphs goes, you should > not expect it to be fast at all. All that is implemented right now is > in Python, all the property checks are in Python, and no optimizations > of any kind have been done. What needs to happen first is optimization > of the canonical labeling function. That is what I expected, but hopefully won't be too big a problem - the *nice* part about 'customers' needing insane ease is that they usually don't need insane speed! The tree generator alone (linear or not) will be extremely helpful. Thanks as always! --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@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-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: graphs(n) behavior under restriction
In sage 2.10, if you type sage: graphs? The whole bottom part of the documentation clearly explains how to use the graph iterator. You don't need to dig around in any source for that. I'll add a line at the top that indicates to go down for that... > Okay, then I have a different question. Is it possible or even > somewhat efficient to first generate all graphs of n vertices (for n > small, whatever that means) and then test them for a property such as > size == m? E.g. something like > sage: L=list(graphs(3)) > sage: M=filter(lambda G: G.size()==3, L) > sage: M > [Graph on 3 vertices] The graphs(...) construction is naturally an iterator, so instead of constructing a list, just iterate through them, saving the ones you need. Try this: sage: def check_size(g): : return g.size() == 6 : sage: L = [] sage: for g in graphs(7): : if check_size(g): : L.append(g) : > Even the syntax of the graphs_list.show_graphs(list) is pretty thorny > and certainly nonintuitive compared to the rest of Sage graphics, Can you give an example of what you're talking about? Given any arbitrary list of Sage objects, the only obvious choice I can think of is the GraphicsArray object, which usually wants a list of lists anyway. The whole reason we wrote the graphs_list set of functions was to make it easier to get nice plots of lists of graphs. It would be much easier for us to make you happy regarding this point if you could give us an example of other sage objects that act so nicely. > Having to use lambda constructions (which are very hard to understand > coming from the math side of things) to do what I am trying to do is too > much. There is no need to use lambda constructions at all- they are just functions! For example, try the following: sage: def is_bip(g): : return g.is_bipartite() : sage: for g in graphs(5, is_bip): : print g.graph6_string() : D?? D_? Do? Ds? Ds_ D`? Dp? Dr? D`_ Dp_ Dh_ Dl_ Dlg Finally, regarding efficiency, there are absolutely no guarantees. The canonical labeling of graphs is somewhat competitive, but it still has a ways to go to catch up, and it is currently going through a major overhaul by yours truly. As far as generating graphs goes, you should not expect it to be fast at all. All that is implemented right now is in Python, all the property checks are in Python, and no optimizations of any kind have been done. What needs to happen first is optimization of the canonical labeling function. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@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-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: graphs(n) behavior under restriction
I should add that the existence of the ability to do sage: for g in graphs(n): : do stuff... was entirely a result of my research. It was just a toy example I did for myself to understand the algorithm, which I intend to use for other purposes. Also, coming very soon will be a linear time (in the number of things generated) tree generator! --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@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-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Problems with standalone python/sage scripts
On 19 Jan., 14:57, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think the upshot of the entire discussion above is (or should be) to use > > #!/usr/bin/env sage > > instead of > > #!/usr/bin/env sage -python > > This assumes sage is in your path -- and indeed it should be if you want > to write portable scripts. > > The second form above, e.g., > > #!/usr/bin/env sage -python > > only works on OS X. The first form, e.g., > > #!/usr/bin/env sage > > works on both OS X and linux. Both are equivalent in behavior on OS X. mmhhh..., you may have a look at the sage-support thread called "exponentiation bug?", according to this thread sage -python refers to the python version of sage as opposed to the system's version of python and nothing else, this sounds Ok, but from "#!/usr/bin/env sage" i expect 2^8 to be wrapped to 2**8, or? typing "/usr/bin/env sage" on the shell command line brings me to the sage prompt whereas "/usr/bin/env sage-python" brings me to the python promp, so in OS X both commands bring you to the same prompt? Georg --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@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-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Sage 2.10 released!
On Saturday 19 January 2008, William Stein wrote: > On Jan 19, 2008 7:39 AM, mabshoff > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jan 19, 12:06 pm, bill purvis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Saturday 19 January 2008, mabshoff wrote:> Hello folks, > > > > > > > Sage 2.10 has been released on January 18th, 2008. It is available at > > > > > > > >http://sagemath.org/download.html > > > > > > > > * About Sage (http://www.sagemath.org) > > > > Hi Bill, > > > > > As a relative newbie to sage-devel can I ask: > > > Is it safe to assume that 2.10 is essentially the same as 2.10.alpha4? > > > If not can I simply apply a few fixes to save the effort of > > > downloading, compiling and testing everything? > > > > You can run ./sage -upgrade which will only download the latest bits > > and pieces and compile those. From alpha4 it is only the > > sage-2.10.spkg (and also some other smaller spkgs like ext). There is > > no tricial way to get and apply the patches [it is possible, just not > > tricial] since this time we did some merging post alpha4 that got > > attributed to alpha4. > > Well there is also doing: > > sage: hg_sage.pull() > sage: hg_sage.merge() > > sage: hg_doc.pull() > sage: hg_doc.merge() > > That would probably be almost as good as upgrading. > > William > Thanks, both, Running ./sage -upgrade as this goes out Bill -- +---+ | Bill Purvis, Amateur Mathematician| | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | http://bil.members.beeb.net | +---+ --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@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-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Sage 2.10 released!
On Jan 19, 2008 7:39 AM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Jan 19, 12:06 pm, bill purvis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Saturday 19 January 2008, mabshoff wrote:> Hello folks, > > > > > Sage 2.10 has been released on January 18th, 2008. It is available at > > > > >http://sagemath.org/download.html > > > > > * About Sage (http://www.sagemath.org) > > Hi Bill, > > > As a relative newbie to sage-devel can I ask: > > Is it safe to assume that 2.10 is essentially the same as 2.10.alpha4? > > If not can I simply apply a few fixes to save the effort of downloading, > > compiling and testing everything? > > You can run ./sage -upgrade which will only download the latest bits > and pieces and compile those. From alpha4 it is only the > sage-2.10.spkg (and also some other smaller spkgs like ext). There is > no tricial way to get and apply the patches [it is possible, just not > tricial] since this time we did some merging post alpha4 that got > attributed to alpha4. Well there is also doing: sage: hg_sage.pull() sage: hg_sage.merge() sage: hg_doc.pull() sage: hg_doc.merge() That would probably be almost as good as upgrading. William --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@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-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Sage 2.10 released!
On Jan 19, 12:06 pm, bill purvis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Saturday 19 January 2008, mabshoff wrote:> Hello folks, > > > Sage 2.10 has been released on January 18th, 2008. It is available at > > >http://sagemath.org/download.html > > > * About Sage (http://www.sagemath.org) Hi Bill, > As a relative newbie to sage-devel can I ask: > Is it safe to assume that 2.10 is essentially the same as 2.10.alpha4? > If not can I simply apply a few fixes to save the effort of downloading, > compiling and testing everything? You can run ./sage -upgrade which will only download the latest bits and pieces and compile those. From alpha4 it is only the sage-2.10.spkg (and also some other smaller spkgs like ext). There is no tricial way to get and apply the patches [it is possible, just not tricial] since this time we did some merging post alpha4 that got attributed to alpha4. > Bill Cheers, Michael > +---+ > | Bill Purvis, Amateur Mathematician| > | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | > | http://bil.members.beeb.net | > +---+ --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@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-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Problems with standalone python/sage scripts
On Jan 19, 2008 2:25 AM, bill purvis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Saturday 19 January 2008, Ondrej Certik wrote: > > On Jan 19, 2008 7:38 AM, Ondrej Certik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Jan 18, 2008 10:00 PM, Georg Grafendorfer > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Michael, > > > > OK, i'm already a bit confused, and i don't know any more what your > > > > requesting exactly, so i will repeat some things: > > > > > > > > The file with the name ./example.sage > > > > #!/home/georg/Daten/.System/bin/sage/sage -python > > > > import sys > > > > > > > > gives me that strange mouse behaviour where the mouse pointer changes > > > > to a cross (but not this "X-cross" known from pure X-Window) and > > > > clicking on the 3 mouse buttons brings me back to the command line with > > > > no output at all, this is because of the "import sys" line, without > > > > this line nothing happens (just back to the next command line prompt). > > > > > > This made me curious, becuase I also use Debian (sid) and I get the > > > exact same behaviour > > > as you do and I wasn't able to figure out where the problem is in the > > > last 10 minutes. Need to go now. > > > > ok, this works: > > > Case 1: > > $ cat t.py > > #!/bin/sh /home/ondra/ext/sage/sage > > import sys > > $ ./t.py > > $ > > > > And this doesn't: > > > Case 2: > > $ cat t.py > > #!/home/ondra/ext/sage/sage > > import sys > > $ ./t.py > > > > (I get the cross - which means that it's bash, who is executing that file > > btw) > > > Case 3: > > $ cat t.py > > #!/bin/sh /home/ondra/ext/sage/sage -python > > import sys > > $ ./t.py > > /bin/sh: /home/ondra/ext/sage/sage -python: No such file or directory > > > > > > So I don't know. But it must be something stupid - I bet this used to > > work for me before. > > > > Ondrej > I just tried this under Ubuntu. > Case 1 works > > Case 2 outputs > ./t.py: line 2: import: command not found > > Case 3 behaves as yours. > > My 2p: My understanding of the #! convention is that the line is split > up into three parts: > #! > > > The must be an executable PROGRAM, not a script. > The > This would explain my behaviour. Don't know what Debian does in case 2, > Ubuntu seems to just ignore the first line if it's not a true executable > and executes the rest of the file with /bin/sh. I just posted a patch related to this discussion here http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/1789 I think the upshot of the entire discussion above is (or should be) to use #!/usr/bin/env sage instead of #!/usr/bin/env sage -python This assumes sage is in your path -- and indeed it should be if you want to write portable scripts. The second form above, e.g., #!/usr/bin/env sage -python only works on OS X. The first form, e.g., #!/usr/bin/env sage works on both OS X and linux. Both are equivalent in behavior on OS X. -- william --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@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-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Sage 2.10 released!
On Saturday 19 January 2008, mabshoff wrote: > Hello folks, > > Sage 2.10 has been released on January 18th, 2008. It is available at > >http://sagemath.org/download.html > > * About Sage (http://www.sagemath.org) > As a relative newbie to sage-devel can I ask: Is it safe to assume that 2.10 is essentially the same as 2.10.alpha4? If not can I simply apply a few fixes to save the effort of downloading, compiling and testing everything? Bill -- +---+ | Bill Purvis, Amateur Mathematician| | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | http://bil.members.beeb.net | +---+ --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@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-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Problems with standalone python/sage scripts
On Saturday 19 January 2008, Ondrej Certik wrote: > On Jan 19, 2008 7:38 AM, Ondrej Certik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jan 18, 2008 10:00 PM, Georg Grafendorfer > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Michael, > > > OK, i'm already a bit confused, and i don't know any more what your > > > requesting exactly, so i will repeat some things: > > > > > > The file with the name ./example.sage > > > #!/home/georg/Daten/.System/bin/sage/sage -python > > > import sys > > > > > > gives me that strange mouse behaviour where the mouse pointer changes > > > to a cross (but not this "X-cross" known from pure X-Window) and > > > clicking on the 3 mouse buttons brings me back to the command line with > > > no output at all, this is because of the "import sys" line, without > > > this line nothing happens (just back to the next command line prompt). > > > > This made me curious, becuase I also use Debian (sid) and I get the > > exact same behaviour > > as you do and I wasn't able to figure out where the problem is in the > > last 10 minutes. Need to go now. > > ok, this works: > Case 1: > $ cat t.py > #!/bin/sh /home/ondra/ext/sage/sage > import sys > $ ./t.py > $ > > And this doesn't: > Case 2: > $ cat t.py > #!/home/ondra/ext/sage/sage > import sys > $ ./t.py > > (I get the cross - which means that it's bash, who is executing that file > btw) > Case 3: > $ cat t.py > #!/bin/sh /home/ondra/ext/sage/sage -python > import sys > $ ./t.py > /bin/sh: /home/ondra/ext/sage/sage -python: No such file or directory > > > So I don't know. But it must be something stupid - I bet this used to > work for me before. > > Ondrej I just tried this under Ubuntu. Case 1 works Case 2 outputs ./t.py: line 2: import: command not found Case 3 behaves as yours. My 2p: My understanding of the #! convention is that the line is split up into three parts: #! The must be an executable PROGRAM, not a script. The http://bil.members.beeb.net | +---+ --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@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-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
