Mike S wrote:
On Saturday, May 4, 2013 6:23:33 PM UTC-4, leif wrote:
What does
$ head
/home/mike/data/IRREPLACEABLE_PERSONAL_DATA/SharedDesktopAndConfig/Desktop/SourceCodeForManualInstalls/sage-5.9/local/bin/hg
give?
head
/home/mike/data/IRREPLACEABLE_PERSONAL_DATA/SharedDesk
On Saturday, May 4, 2013 6:23:33 PM UTC-4, leif wrote:
>
>
> What does
>
> $ head
> /home/mike/data/IRREPLACEABLE_PERSONAL_DATA/SharedDesktopAndConfig/Desktop/SourceCodeForManualInstalls/sage-5.9/local/bin/hg
>
>
>
> give?
>
>
> -leif
>
> --
> () The ASCII Ribbon Campaign
> /\ Help Cure H
Mike S wrote:
I tried to build Sage 5.9 this morning, and it ended up failing after an hour and a half
when it tried to build Mercurial. Mercurial itself techically built, but it
"doesn't seem to work properly," so the build process errored out and told me
to post a message here.
I just used
First, techically -> technically.* ;)
Second, I want to ask a quick follow-up question: In the meantime, I may
want to try using one of the preexisting binary builds, but I'm not sure
how exactly they've been packaged. Is this a simple matter of "If it works
it works, and if it doesn't it doe
I tried to build Sage 5.9 this morning, and it ended up failing after an hour
and a half when it tried to build Mercurial. Mercurial itself techically
built, but it "doesn't seem to work properly," so the build process errored out
and told me to post a message here.
I just used the standard "m
Working on ticket #14496 (http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/14496)
I have met the following problem:
I have defined a function "q_binomial"
and an alias for this function : "gaussian_binomial"
but the definition of "q_binomial" contains a reference, say to [iota2013]
Then the document
Volker Braun wrote:
On Saturday, May 4, 2013 1:22:36 AM UTC+1, leif wrote:
I don't think I'm the only one occasionally saving files even when
they're (currently) not in a functional state, and auto-saving is a
feature presumably a couple of people use as well.
Your editor sucks. Ap
Unless you put the ticket number in the patch file name. Which will be much
more helpful when dealing with multiple patches than having it in the
commit message.
On Saturday, May 4, 2013 7:45:50 PM UTC+1, leif wrote:
>
> I wouldn't say it's preferred or recommended, because that way you of
> c
Volker Braun wrote:
Afaik the documentation is out of date: It is preferred to not include
the ticket number. You can, but Jeroen's merger script will strip it out
for you and put it in in our format.
I wouldn't say it's preferred or recommended, because that way you of
course only see the tic
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 8:05 AM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
>
> On Saturday, May 4, 2013 1:18:55 AM UTC-7, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Saturday, May 4, 2013 12:05:29 AM UTC+2, John H Palmieri wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Friday, May 3, 2013 2:26:21 PM UTC-7, Sébastien Labbé wrote:
On Saturday, May 4, 2013 1:18:55 AM UTC-7, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote:
>
>
>
> On Saturday, May 4, 2013 12:05:29 AM UTC+2, John H Palmieri wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Friday, May 3, 2013 2:26:21 PM UTC-7, Sébastien Labbé wrote:
>>>
>>> > * 8 had problems with the patch itself, like a bad commit message
On Friday, May 3, 2013 7:03:16 AM UTC+1, Thomas Feulner wrote:
>
> When composing a ``RingHomomorphism`` and an instance of
> ``RingHomomorphism_im_gens`` then
> the images of the generators are again checked for their validity ... I
> would just add ''check=False'' to the call.
>
I think this
Afaik the documentation is out of date: It is preferred to not include the
ticket number. You can, but Jeroen's merger script will strip it out for
you and put it in in our format.
On Friday, May 3, 2013 10:26:21 PM UTC+1, Sébastien Labbé wrote:
>
> Related to this, what is the status about the
Don't tell me that the use case for attach is to attach parallel
long-running computations. Thats insane. You want to attach code that you
are actively working on, and that completes evaluation relatively quickly.
And you are still charge of triggering the reload, the only difference is
that th
On Saturday, May 4, 2013 1:22:36 AM UTC+1, leif wrote:
> I don't think I'm the only one occasionally saving files even when
> they're (currently) not in a functional state, and auto-saving is a
> feature presumably a couple of people use as well.
>
Your editor sucks. Apparently it can't be tru
On Saturday, May 4, 2013 12:05:29 AM UTC+2, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
>
>
> On Friday, May 3, 2013 2:26:21 PM UTC-7, Sébastien Labbé wrote:
>>
>> > * 8 had problems with the patch itself, like a bad commit message or
>> a
>> > malformed patch file.
>>
>> What does "bad commit message" means? T
16 matches
Mail list logo
