[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 UR

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.0 notebook fails to display

On Apr 23, 3:50 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Tim, > On a clean build (see specs below) > (log is at ) > > I tried > > sage: hg_sage.pull() > sage: hg_sage.update() > sage: hg_sage.merge() > but it says there is nothing to merge. > > Tim When

[sage-devel] Sage 3.0 notebook fails to display

On a clean build (see specs below) (log is at ) ./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-5

[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 > >  opin

[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 opin

[sage-devel] Re: Project

On Apr 23, 2:08 am, root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Tim, > >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 se

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.0 is out

Installed fine and all tests passed on an ubuntu 7.10 amd64 machine. On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 2:10 AM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello folks, > > Sage 3.0 has been released on April 21st, 2008. It is available at > >http://sagemath.org/download.html > > * About Sage (h

[sage-devel] Re: Project

On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 10:42 AM, William Stein wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 6:50 AM, Bill Page wrote: > ... > > I should also admit that most of my rant in the previous email > > was in fact a prelude to asking William to try to intervene with > > NAG on our behalf precisely become

[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 ne

[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 ba

[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 g

[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://

[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

[sage-devel] Re: Project

On Apr 22, 11:25 pm, root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Tim, > >. > >                          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 r

[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

[sage-devel] Re: Project

>. > 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 li

[sage-devel] Re: Change of behaviour with sage-3.0

On Tuesday 22 April 2008, William Stein wrote: > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 10:03 AM, bill purvis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I've just run upgrade() on my 3.0.rc0 to bring it up to 3.0 (I think). > > Ran OK, so I then tried to open the notebook (sage -notebook). > > Started up OK, but the tab

[sage-devel] Re: Project

On Apr 22, 4:35 pm, Robert Dodier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > mabshoff wrote: Hi Robert, > > 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, b

[sage-devel] Re: Project

On Apr 22, 3:50 pm, "Bill Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Michael, Hi Bill, > >  At least testing ships CVS head. > > Are you sure? I suppose that we had better check with Camm. 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 wire

[sage-devel] Re: Change of behaviour with sage-3.0

On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 10:03 AM, bill purvis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I've just run upgrade() on my 3.0.rc0 to bring it up to 3.0 (I think). > Ran OK, so I then tried to open the notebook (sage -notebook). > Started up OK, but the tab opened in my Firefox browser with >https://:8000/

[sage-devel] Re: Compilation using CC and CXX

On 4/22/08, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Ideally, it would be nice to (e.g) > > > > > export CC=gcc-4.3 > > > export CXX=g++-4.3 > > > I don't like this and I don't think it is worth fixing in the first > place since this introduces potentially subtle bugs since we might end >

[sage-devel] Re: Compilation using CC and CXX

On Apr 22, 7:05 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 9:47 AM, mabshoff > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >  On Apr 22, 6:23 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >  > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 9:19 AM, Gonzalo Tornaria > > >  Hi, > > >  > <[EMAIL

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.0 is out

That worked for me to (after the pull()) on a 64-bit Suse machine. John 2008/4/22 Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > 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 be

[sage-devel] Re: Compilation using CC and CXX

On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 9:47 AM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Apr 22, 6:23 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 9:19 AM, Gonzalo Tornaria > > Hi, > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Ideally, it would be nice to (e.g) > > > >

[sage-devel] Change of behaviour with sage-3.0

I've just run upgrade() on my 3.0.rc0 to bring it up to 3.0 (I think). Ran OK, so I then tried to open the notebook (sage -notebook). Started up OK, but the tab opened in my Firefox browser with https://:8000/ which Firefox didn't like. Edit in 'localhost' and it starts up as it used to. Is

[sage-devel] Re: Compilation using CC and CXX

On Apr 22, 6:23 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 9:19 AM, Gonzalo Tornaria Hi, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >  Ideally, it would be nice to (e.g) > > >  export CC=gcc-4.3 > >  export CXX=g++-4.3 I don't like this and I don't think it is worth fixing

[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

[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

[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: > >   > > You have to use a c99 compliant compiler. You're using gcc-3.2.2 which isn

[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: > > 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

[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_sag

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.0 is out

Sage 3.0 build failed. See: --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 h

[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 th

[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 op

[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 (htt

[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) > > >

[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 fo

[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 interes

[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

[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 ECL

[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, "

[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, mabsho

[sage-devel] Re: Project

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 > > > >

[sage-devel] Re: Project

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 p

[sage-devel] Re: Project

On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 12:36 AM, Bill Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 De

[sage-devel] Re: Coercion

Sure. See you there. On Apr 22, 2008, at 12:50 AM, David Roe wrote: > > Hey, > If you want to log onto sage-devel, I'm working on coercion and had a > few things to talk about. > David > > --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@goog

[sage-devel] Re: Fwd: mercurial --> plain text --> mercurial

On Apr 22, 9:41 am, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Apr 21, 2008, at 11:34 AM, mabshoff wrote: > > The number of bundles in trac is rather small and most of those > > bundles either have review issues or shouldn't be bundles in the first > > place [as you stated above], so applyin

[sage-devel] Re: Project

On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 2:39 AM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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? Sorry if it sounded like a troll. Tim and others can e

[sage-devel] Coercion

Hey, If you want to log onto sage-devel, I'm working on coercion and had a few things to talk about. David --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For mor

[sage-devel] Re: Fwd: mercurial --> plain text --> mercurial

On Apr 21, 2008, at 11:34 AM, mabshoff wrote: > On Apr 21, 8:24 pm, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> On Apr 21, 2008, at 11:14 AM, William Stein wrote: > > Hi, > Yes, I could. This would mean that no pre-3.0 bundles would apply to post-3.0 (short of re-basing the

[sage-devel] Re: Project

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

[sage-devel] Re: Project

On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 1:41 AM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > 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 w