Dear all,
at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support/browse_thread/thread/534306c87e7fac7a
I was asking about the apparently changed behaviour of sage -t.
Georg suggested to move the discussion to sage-devel, so, here it
is...
On 20 Jun., 22:10, gsw georgswe...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 20
Title pretty much says it all.
http://www.sagemath.org/
says Download 4.0.1
following the links and one finds a link to
http://sage.math.washington.edu/sage/src/sage-4.0.2.tar
Easy to fix I guess.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to
On 21 Jun., 08:28, Simon King simon.k...@uni-jena.de wrote:
Dear all,
athttp://groups.google.com/group/sage-support/browse_thread/thread/5343...
I was asking about the apparently changed behaviour of sage -t.
Georg suggested to move the discussion to sage-devel, so, here it
is...
On 20
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Before building gcc 4.4.0 on 't2' I needed to build mpfr, as it is
perquisite for gcc.
I built the latest version of mpfr (2.4.1) using the Sun supplied gcc
3.4.2 in /usr/sfw/bin. mpfr built and passed all 148 tests.
With the aid:
1) The aid of a patch to
I just found this one:
http://fr2.rpmfind.net//linux/RPM/mandriva/devel/cooker/i586/media/contrib/testing/sagemath-4.0.1-4mdv2010.0.i586.html
H
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group,
2009/6/21 Dr. David Kirkby david.kir...@onetel.net:
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Before building gcc 4.4.0 on 't2' I needed to build mpfr, as it is
perquisite for gcc.
I built the latest version of mpfr (2.4.1) using the Sun supplied gcc
3.4.2 in /usr/sfw/bin. mpfr built and passed all 148
2009/6/21 Dr. David Kirkby david.kir...@onetel.net:
Title pretty much says it all.
http://www.sagemath.org/
says Download 4.0.1
following the links and one finds a link to
http://sage.math.washington.edu/sage/src/sage-4.0.2.tar
Easy to fix I guess.
This is *on purpose*. We don't
I quote from
http://www.sagemath.org/doc/developer/inclusion.html
which is about the inclusion procedure for new packages. The first
requirement is written as:
The license must be a GPL version 2+ compatible license. (This will
be publicly revisited around Jan 15, 2009.)
Whatever was
2009/6/21 Dr. David Kirkby david.kir...@onetel.net:
In the patches directory of ntl-5.4.2.p7 there are two files which I'd
consider makefiles (i.e. make would understand them)
-rw-r- 1 kirkby 1093 443 Mar 24 2008 ntl_makefile
-rw-r--r-- 1 kirkby 1093 17194 May 11
2009/6/21 Bjarke Hammersholt Roune bjarke.ro...@gmail.com:
I quote from
http://www.sagemath.org/doc/developer/inclusion.html
which is about the inclusion procedure for new packages. The first
requirement is written as:
The license must be a GPL version 2+ compatible license. (This will
2009/6/20 Golam Mortuza Hossain gmhoss...@gmail.com:
Hi,
It seems that there is a major bug in new symbolics simplify()
method involving D and symbolic function (Sage-4.0.1).
---
sage: f(x) = function('f',x)
sage: f(-x).diff(x)
-D[0](f)(-x)
sage: f(-x).diff(x).simplify()
On 19 Jun., 08:28, gsw georgswe...@googlemail.com wrote:
I checked back for the my Sage-4.0.1 Intel Mac OS X 10.4 build and
unfortunately yes, this problem is there, too --- so the currently
bdist'ed version is flawed :-/
I don't seem to have my Sage-4.0 logs anymore, but I found those
William Stein wrote:
2009/6/21 Dr. David Kirkby david.kir...@onetel.net:
In the patches directory of ntl-5.4.2.p7 there are two files which I'd
consider makefiles (i.e. make would understand them)
-rw-r- 1 kirkby 1093 443 Mar 24 2008 ntl_makefile
-rw-r--r-- 1 kirkby
On 21 Jun., 15:54, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/6/21 Bjarke Hammersholt Roune bjarke.ro...@gmail.com:
I quote from
http://www.sagemath.org/doc/developer/inclusion.html
which is about the inclusion procedure for new packages. The first
requirement is written as:
On 21 Jun., 15:37, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/6/21 gsw georgswe...@googlemail.com:
On 21 Jun., 08:28, Simon King simon.k...@uni-jena.de wrote:
Dear all,
athttp://groups.google.com/group/sage-support/browse_thread/thread/5343...
I was asking about the apparently
I just looked at the release notes for NTL 5.5
(http://www.shoup.net/ntl/doc/tour-changes.html). There are only two
things. One is fixing gmp's xgcd function (which should not matter to
Sage since Sage now uses mpir and not gmp, right? and wasn't that
very thing one reason for the gmp/mpir
2009/6/21 gsw georgswe...@googlemail.com:
On 21 Jun., 15:54, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/6/21 Bjarke Hammersholt Roune bjarke.ro...@gmail.com:
I quote from
http://www.sagemath.org/doc/developer/inclusion.html
which is about the inclusion procedure for new packages.
This should be of interest to anyone who has ever had to manage
precision issues between Sage and pari real and complex numbers (e.g.
Alex Ghitza). Others can move on.
In the conversion of a pari complex number back to Sage (in
sage/libs/pari/gen_py.py in the function python(z)), the precision
Let's set up a regular time frame to publicly revisit the Sage
licensing, say in yearly intervals.
I believe that other projects have had difficulty tracking down people
who contributed code in the past when trying to deal with licensing
issues. Why is our project different?
Nick
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 8:34 PM, Nick Alexanderncalexan...@gmail.com wrote:
Let's set up a regular time frame to publicly revisit the Sage
licensing, say in yearly intervals.
I believe that other projects have had difficulty tracking down people
who contributed code in the past when trying
Hi John,
On 21 Jun., 17:47, John Cremona john.crem...@gmail.com wrote:
This should be of interest to anyone who has ever had to manage
precision issues between Sage and pari real and complex numbers (e.g.
Alex Ghitza). Others can move on.
In the conversion of a pari complex number back to
When I tried to build Sage on my Blade 2000 with gcc 4.4.0 configured to
use the Sun linker, so it failed to build, when building ATLAS.
make[3]: Entering directory
`/export/home/drkirkby/sage/sage-4.0.2/spkg/build/atlas-3.8.3.p3/ATLAS-build/lib'
ld -shared -soname libatlas.so -o
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 8:38 PM, gswgeorgswe...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi John,
On 21 Jun., 17:47, John Cremona john.crem...@gmail.com wrote:
This should be of interest to anyone who has ever had to manage
precision issues between Sage and pari real and complex numbers (e.g.
Alex Ghitza).
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
I downloaded the ATLAS source code from sourceforge, built, tested and
installed that with no problem at all. However, I note it only maked
static libraries, not shared libraries on my Sun Blade 2000.
I would add, building, testing, *tuning* and installing ATLAS
2009/6/21 William Stein wst...@gmail.com:
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 8:38 PM, gswgeorgswe...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi John,
On 21 Jun., 17:47, John Cremona john.crem...@gmail.com wrote:
This should be of interest to anyone who has ever had to manage
precision issues between Sage and pari
Hi Georg,
The root cause was the patch for trac #2513 which was incorporated in
Sage-4.0.2.alpha4, concerning the setting (or not ...) of the variable
LANG in the sage-env script.
I'll prepare a nice patch with some explanations for the R.spkg's
spkg-install script to use 'LANG=en_US.UTF-8
William Stein wrote:
2009/6/21 Dr. David Kirkby david.kir...@onetel.net:
In the patches directory of ntl-5.4.2.p7 there are two files which I'd
consider makefiles (i.e. make would understand them)
-rw-r- 1 kirkby 1093 443 Mar 24 2008 ntl_makefile
-rw-r--r-- 1 kirkby
The spkg also works on a Fedora 11, x86_64 box.
regards
john perry
On Jun 20, 11:13 am, Andrzej Giniewicz ggi...@gmail.com wrote:
Final update on my Arch Linux current try - with #6362 all tests passed!
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Andrzej Giniewiczggi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
small
Hi,
as mentioned earlier I am preparing a talk on how to get started with Sage
development for Tuesday here at SD16. A first rc for my set of slides is at:
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/malb/talks/sagedev.pdf
It still seems rather dull to be honest. I'd appreciate any input.
I liked it:-) Great job!
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 6:46 PM, Martin
Albrechtm...@informatik.uni-bremen.de wrote:
Hi,
as mentioned earlier I am preparing a talk on how to get started with Sage
development for Tuesday here at SD16. A first rc for my set of slides is at:
Hi Martin,
On 6/22/09, Martin Albrecht m...@informatik.uni-bremen.de wrote:
Hi,
as mentioned earlier I am preparing a talk on how to get started with Sage
development for Tuesday here at SD16. A first rc for my set of slides is at:
Hi,
one of the rule for getting code into Sage is 100% doctesting --- what
does it mean exactly?
At least one doctest per function/method? Is there some tool to check
that? I think I remember there was some script for it, but I can't
find it now.
However, at least to me, just one doctest per
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 10:54 AM, William Steinwst...@gmail.com wrote:
Does anybody who cares a lot have a strong opinion on whether Sage
should start allowing in new libraries that are licensed GPLv3+? If
so, why? Please, no flamebait, unless you post only to the
sage-flame mailing list
Ondrej,
I believe the tools you want are
sage -coverage files
sage -coverageall
which you can find again listed when you do
sage -advanced
Rob
On Jun 21, 4:41 pm, Ondrej Certik ond...@certik.cz wrote:
Hi,
one of the rule for getting code into Sage is 100% doctesting --- what
does it
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 1:42 AM, Gonzalo
Tornariatorna...@math.utexas.edu wrote:
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 10:54 AM, William Steinwst...@gmail.com wrote:
Does anybody who cares a lot have a strong opinion on whether Sage
should start allowing in new libraries that are licensed GPLv3+? If
so,
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 1:41 AM, Ondrej Certikond...@certik.cz wrote:
Hi,
one of the rule for getting code into Sage is 100% doctesting --- what
does it mean exactly?
At least one doctest per function/method?
Yes.
Is there some tool to check
that?
Yes.
I think I remember there was
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 12:46 AM, Martin
Albrechtm...@informatik.uni-bremen.de wrote:
Hi,
as mentioned earlier I am preparing a talk on how to get started with Sage
development for Tuesday here at SD16. A first rc for my set of slides is at:
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Rob Beezergoo...@beezer.cotse.net wrote:
Ondrej,
I believe the tools you want are
sage -coverage files
sage -coverageall
Yes, thanks! It's in local/bin/sage-coverage. Here is an example:
$ sage -coverage devel/sage/sage/calculus/calculus.py
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 9:14 PM, William Steinwst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 1:42 AM, Gonzalo
Tornariatorna...@math.utexas.edu wrote:
At some point in time, Sage included code which was GPLv2 only.
Authors were requested to extend their license to be GPLv2+, to allow
the
Hi Martin,
Very nice! It's been on my Sage to-do list for some time to attempt
something similar for the wiki or the developer's guide. At a
minimum, I hope this presentation can get a pointer from the wiki
(once its completed) from someplace other than just the SD16 pages.
Some suggestions:
40 matches
Mail list logo
