Le vendredi 10 février, John Cremona a écrit:
> Specifically: in the Makefile the option --as-needed is passed from
> gcc to ld
That switch is written as-is in the Makefile? Or does it come from
elsewhere?
Snark on #sagemath
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
Hi David,
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 10:12 AM, David Roe wrote:
> We're especially looking for people for Review Days and Doc Days. If you're
> excited about incorporating the patchbot into Sage and making it easier for
> people to contribute code to Sage you should come to Review Days! And if
> y
On 2/10/12 10:49 PM, Rob Beezer wrote:
Thanks, Jason. Nice work. I added an implicit 3-D plot example as a
third example on my personal home page, and it seems to load and run
quite quickly. Looking at the page source there (plus a few CSS items
in buzzard.css to hide some of the debugging out
Thanks, Jason. Nice work. I added an implicit 3-D plot example as a
third example on my personal home page, and it seems to load and run
quite quickly. Looking at the page source there (plus a few CSS items
in buzzard.css to hide some of the debugging output) might be helpful
for those who want
Hi there,
I just added the following feature to sphinx in Sage: In the doc, putting
:trac:`5534` adds a link to the trac ticket #5534. I think it's worth
advertising so that it will be used more. As Nathann asked, I also added a
:wikipedia: for wikipedia role. See for example
:wikipedia:`Sag
We're still looking for some more people. We'll be moving Bug Days a week
later to accommodate multiple requests, so it will now be May 24-29. As
William noted in a followup e-mail, these events will all be held at the
University of Washington in Seattle.
We're especially looking for people for
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> I would like to announce a working Sage on OS X 10.7. It requires XCode
> 4 and setting SAGE_PORT=yes, but apart from that it builds from source
> "out of the box". The main new thing is that we include a GCC spkg (to
> build a C, C++ and
> >> Whatever it takes to build/test Sage these days for RAM, plus disk
> >> space for a single Sage install + 100MB/ticket disk.
>
> > Hmm, 100MB per ticket is actually nontrivial on older machines.
>
> True, though for modern hardware, this comes out to about $0.01/ticket.
Right, I'm talking a
Awesome!
Given this, do you have an estimate for the release timetable for Sage 5.0?
David
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 14:09, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> I would like to announce a working Sage on OS X 10.7. It requires XCode
> 4 and setting SAGE_PORT=yes, but apart from that it builds from source
> "o
I would like to announce a working Sage on OS X 10.7. It requires XCode
4 and setting SAGE_PORT=yes, but apart from that it builds from source
"out of the box". The main new thing is that we include a GCC spkg (to
build a C, C++ and Fortran compiler), replacing the old Fortran spkg.
It builds and
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 12:17 PM, D. S. McNeil wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 4:27 AM, Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
>> It's easy.
>>
>> 1) Download and build a pristine copy of Sage for testing.
>> 2) Apply http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12486 to the
>> sage-scripts directory.
>> 3) Run
On 10 February 2012 21:29, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> Could somebody with some knowledge of porting (in particular to Solaris)
> have a look at ticket #10993? It's about upgrading the eclib spkg, but
> there are some portability problems.
Specifically: in the Makefile the option --as-needed is pass
Could somebody with some knowledge of porting (in particular to Solaris)
have a look at ticket #10993? It's about upgrading the eclib spkg, but
there are some portability problems.
Thanks,
Jeroen.
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this gr
On 10 Feb, 2012, at 11:43 AM, Jonathan Bober wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Justin C. Walker wrote:
>
> On 10 Feb, 2012, at 02:06 AM, Jonathan Bober wrote:
>
> > By "sage in terminal" I mean "not the notebook."
> >
> > In recent builds (maybe mostly in the sage-5.0-beta serie
Sounds like a good idea.
David
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 08:19, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
> I see a question on sage-support where someone had troubles on OS X, as he
> had installed a 10.6 binary on a 10.5 machine. With all the different
> binaries, I can see it being fairly easy to pick the wrong o
Hello,
I just compiled sage-5.0.beta3 from source on OS X 10.6.7 with:
> export MAKE="make -j8"
> make
After building successfully I run the tests with:
> make ptest
All tests passed.
The problem appeared when I tried the example on inline_fortran, see
traceback down below. Similar error shows
On Feb 10, 3:17 pm, "D. S. McNeil" wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 4:27 AM, Robert Bradshaw
>
> wrote:
> > It's easy.
>
> > 1) Download and build a pristine copy of Sage for testing.
> > 2) Applyhttp://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12486to the
> > sage-scripts directory.
> > 3) Run sage -
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 4:27 AM, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> It's easy.
>
> 1) Download and build a pristine copy of Sage for testing.
> 2) Apply http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12486 to the
> sage-scripts directory.
> 3) Run sage --patchbot
There are maybe two tweaks to these directions I
Thanks so much for the answers to all this, Robert.
> > What are the resource requirements on something like this? For
> > example,
>
> > * How many free MB should be always available?
>
> Whatever it takes to build/test Sage these days for RAM, plus disk
> space for a single Sage install + 100M
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Justin C. Walker wrote:
>
> On 10 Feb, 2012, at 02:06 AM, Jonathan Bober wrote:
>
> > By "sage in terminal" I mean "not the notebook."
> >
> > In recent builds (maybe mostly in the sage-5.0-beta series, but maybe
> 4.8, and maybe older -- I know that's not too he
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 10:55 AM, kcrisman wrote:
>
>
> On Feb 10, 4:27 am, Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
>> It's easy.
>>
>> 1) Download and build a pristine copy of Sage for testing.
>> 2) Applyhttp://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12486to the
>> sage-scripts directory.
>> 3) Run sage --patchbot
On 10 Feb, 2012, at 02:06 AM, Jonathan Bober wrote:
> By "sage in terminal" I mean "not the notebook."
>
> In recent builds (maybe mostly in the sage-5.0-beta series, but maybe 4.8,
> and maybe older -- I know that's not too helpful) I've occasionally noticed
> weird things working with sage f
On Feb 10, 4:27 am, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> It's easy.
>
> 1) Download and build a pristine copy of Sage for testing.
> 2) Applyhttp://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12486to the
> sage-scripts directory.
> 3) Run sage --patchbot
>
> Everyone's results will be consolidated athttp://patchbot.
I see a question on sage-support where someone had troubles on OS X, as he had
installed a 10.6 binary on a 10.5 machine. With all the different binaries, I
can see it being fairly easy to pick the wrong one.
It got me thinking whether it would be more sensible if we distributed Sage as a
self
I added a small patch to the ratpoints spkg to make it build
with gcc on Darwin. Instead of unconditionally adding the compiler flag
-fnested-functions on Darwin, I instead only add it if supported by the
compiler. Please review:
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12368
This is a prerequ
I added a small patch from upstream to the Numpy spkg to make it build
with gcc-4.6.2. Please review:
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12423
This is a prerequisite to building Sage on OS X 10.7 with GCC-4.6.2.
Thanks,
Jeroen.
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@goog
On Friday, 10 February 2012 18:06:46 UTC+8, Jonathan Bober wrote:
>
> By "sage in terminal" I mean "not the notebook."
>
> In recent builds (maybe mostly in the sage-5.0-beta series, but maybe 4.8,
> and maybe older -- I know that's not too helpful) I've occasionally noticed
> weird things wor
Le 10/02/2012 10:00, Volker Braun a écrit :
> I recently note that there is no C++ array template library shipped with
> Sage. I think this is an impediment for more serious numerical
> computations. The whole Cython thing is really nice to speed up Python
> code, but if you are serious about avoid
By "sage in terminal" I mean "not the notebook."
In recent builds (maybe mostly in the sage-5.0-beta series, but maybe 4.8,
and maybe older -- I know that's not too helpful) I've occasionally noticed
weird things working with sage from the command line. Sometimes tab
completion has just completely
It's easy.
1) Download and build a pristine copy of Sage for testing.
2) Apply http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12486 to the
sage-scripts directory.
3) Run sage --patchbot
Everyone's results will be consolidated at
http://patchbot.sagemath.org/ . Hopefully this will allow us to get
resul
I recently note that there is no C++ array template library shipped with
Sage. I think this is an impediment for more serious numerical
computations. The whole Cython thing is really nice to speed up Python
code, but if you are serious about avoiding heap allocation of array
entries then Cython
It took more than a minute to load, but it eventually did. I don't know
why it might be so slow.
David
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 00:23, Iftikhar Burhanuddin <
iftikhar.burhanud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Is http://wiki.sagemath.org down?
>
> I.
>
> --
> To post to this group, send an ema
Hi Justin,
On 10 Feb., 08:28, "Justin C. Walker" wrote:
> I double-checked the log for the install of your package, and indeed, there
> is a pleasant message describing the problem. However, it's embedded in the
> middle of what looks like a disaster alert :-}
>
> There are ~50 lines of output
Hi folks,
Is http://wiki.sagemath.org down?
I.
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: ht
34 matches
Mail list logo
