On 2016-02-05 00:24, John H Palmieri wrote:
Should the model when building from scratch be
./configure --prefix=/target/location
make
make install
One thing which we could try is to make it such that
./configure --prefix=/target/location
make
installs in /target/location. Like Volker said, w
On 2016-02-05 01:44, John H Palmieri wrote:
run the relocation script.
There is no such thing anymore. Sage can no longer be relocated.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails fro
On Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 3:43:47 PM UTC-8, Volker Braun wrote:
>
> On Friday, February 5, 2016 at 12:24:27 AM UTC+1, John H Palmieri wrote:
>>
>> Should the model when building from scratch be
>> ./configure --prefix=/target/location
>> make
>> make install
>>
>
> This basically doesn't w
On Friday, February 5, 2016 at 12:24:27 AM UTC+1, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
> Should the model when building from scratch be
> ./configure --prefix=/target/location
> make
> make install
>
This basically doesn't work if you compile your own dependencies; You have
to "make install" you dependencies
Should the model when building from scratch be
./configure --prefix=/target/location
make
make install
? If not, should we aim for that? Does "make install" do the right thing
these days? It's marked as "experimental" in Makefile.
And for people downloading pre-built binaries, should there be a
On Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 10:25:06 PM UTC+1, Jan Groenewald wrote:
>
> So it seems (with difficulty) Conda patches binaries as well:
> http://conda.pydata.org/docs/building/meta-yaml.html#relocatable
> To make them use relative paths...?
>
No. Just as in Sage, you can only install conda pac
On Thursday, 4 February 2016 21:00:03 UTC, jhonrubia6 wrote:
>
> Ok, that explains it (I keep learning, even the obvious). So if I
> understand correctly I should have merged first, before rebuilding the
> source. Now, it seems there is no way back I guess, other than getting a
> new copy of
Hi
On 4 February 2016 at 23:04, Jan Groenewald wrote:
> Hi
>
> On 4 February 2016 at 22:58, Volker Braun wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 9:45:49 PM UTC+1, Jan Groenewald wrote:
>>>
>>> Most software go ./configure --prefix=path; make; make install
>>> and installs to elsewhere with
Hi
On 4 February 2016 at 22:58, Volker Braun wrote:
> On Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 9:45:49 PM UTC+1, Jan Groenewald wrote:
>>
>> Most software go ./configure --prefix=path; make; make install
>> and installs to elsewhere with known paths for shared libraries, or
>> relative paths for in-pack
Ok, that explains it (I keep learning, even the obvious). So if I
understand correctly I should have merged first, before rebuilding the
source. Now, it seems there is no way back I guess, other than getting a
new copy of the source code.
How do I know the version of a given ticket which needs
On Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 9:45:49 PM UTC+1, Jan Groenewald wrote:
>
> Most software go ./configure --prefix=path; make; make install
> and installs to elsewhere with known paths for shared libraries, or
> relative paths for in-package libraries and you can move the tree.
>
The above comma
Just to point out the obvious: If you check out #18408 then you get
Sage-6.8.beta7
You should merge in the latest Sage if you want to review that ticket; Its
likely that there are merge conflicts anyways which need to be resolved
first.
On Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 7:52:20 PM UTC+1, Jeroen
Hi
Thanks for taking the time to help me learn.
On 4 February 2016 at 16:15, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2016-02-04 15:09, Jan Groenewald wrote:
>
>> But can I say most binaries should not have hard-coded paths patched
>> just after compilation?
>>
> You are right, but only because "most binari
On Thursday, 4 February 2016 17:50:52 UTC, Martin Vahi wrote:
>
>
> I also tried to build the Sage 6.10. This time with the GCC.
> That failed to compile and the problematic
> package at the 6.10 compilation seems to be
>
> ecl-15.3.7p0
>
> The details reside at yet another set of attachment
Nobody ever built Sage with llvm, so you are in totally unchartered waters
here.
It would be interesting to know what goes wrong.
It's also a bit unclear how this would play together with gfortran (which
is part of gcc suite of compilers),
which is needed for a part of Sage.
HTH,
Dima
On Thurs
On 2016-02-04 19:32, jhonrubia6 wrote:
I passed that point and now fails building ecm,...
I do not understand what I am making wrong. I had a working installation
on 7.0, then after checking out a ticket to review (#18408)I tried to
build again and I'm having a lot of problems to get the installa
I passed that point and now fails building ecm,...
I do not understand what I am making wrong. I had a working installation on
7.0, then after checking out a ticket to review (#18408)I tried to build
again and I'm having a lot of problems to get the installation working again
Now building GMP-E
As the compilation dos through the night, maybe there was some internet
downtime that I am not aware of. I will try again and keep track of the
router log, thank you for your help
El jueves, 4 de febrero de 2016, 17:36:46 (UTC+1), Dima Pasechnik escribió:
>
> did the internet connection from the
did the internet connection from the machine die during the build, or
perhaps you are behind some big bad firewall?
On Thursday, 4 February 2016 15:21:59 UTC, jhonrubia6 wrote:
>
> ... and the new error (on make distclean && make) is
>
> /Users/J_Honrubia/Sage/sage-6.10/sage/build/pipestatus "s
... and the new error (on make distclean && make) is
/Users/J_Honrubia/Sage/sage-6.10/sage/build/pipestatus "sage-spkg -f
setuptools-12.4 2>&1" "tee -a
/Users/J_Honrubia/Sage/sage-6.10/sage/logs/pkgs/setuptools-12.4.log"
/Users/J_Honrubia/Sage/sage-6.10/sage/src/bin/sage-env: line 434:
/User
On 2016-02-04 15:09, Jan Groenewald wrote:
But can I say most binaries should not have hard-coded paths patched
just after compilation?
You are right, but only because "most binaries" are compiled with the
correct path in the first place. You have that option with Sage: if you
compile everythin
Hi
On 4 February 2016 at 15:04, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2016-02-04 13:58, Jan Groenewald wrote:
>
>> I thought it would be more like moving / since it was completely
>> self-contained.
>>
> It doesn't matter: I'm sure that moving / will break everything too.
>
> I also agree with Volker that
>
>
> I also agree with Volker that most software is *not* meant to be
> relocatable. I wonder why you think the opposite.
>
>
To be fair (though this has nothing to do with pipedream's situation), if
you are a GUI-only Mac user (say), you might think software is infinitely
relocatable because
On 2016-02-04 13:58, Jan Groenewald wrote:
I thought it would be more like moving / since it was completely
self-contained.
It doesn't matter: I'm sure that moving / will break everything too.
I also agree with Volker that most software is *not* meant to be
relocatable. I wonder why you think
Hi
On 4 February 2016 at 14:23, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> Relocating Sage is like relocating /usr to /otherpath/usr in your favorite
> Linux distro. I bet things will break down completely.
>
I thought it would be more like moving / since it was completely
self-contained.
Regards,
Jan
--
Hi
On 4 February 2016 at 14:30, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2016-02-04 13:02, Jan Groenewald wrote:
>
>> Does it matter for the PPA? Isn't that installed in a fixed location
>> anyway?
>>
>>
>> Yes, changes to this it is what broke the PPA since 6.9.
>>
> Sorry, I didn't understand to wha
What is gcc installed on your system?
And how do you start the compilation?
(these things are not clear from your posts)
On Thursday, 4 February 2016 04:33:43 UTC, Martin Vahi wrote:
>
>
> The source was downloaded on 2016_02_04 from
>
> http://www.sagemath.org/download-source.html
>
> and the s
On Thursday, 4 February 2016 12:30:36 UTC, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> On 2016-02-04 13:02, Jan Groenewald wrote:
> > Does it matter for the PPA? Isn't that installed in a fixed location
> > anyway?
> >
> >
> > Yes, changes to this it is what broke the PPA since 6.9.
> Sorry, I didn't
On Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 1:03:11 PM UTC+1, Jan Groenewald wrote:
>
> I'm under the impression almost all software works relocatable
>
Your impression is incorrect. Try to install any non-trivial (including
shared libraries) deb/rpm into a prefix, good luck. The Fedora packaging
guideline
On 2016-02-04 13:02, Jan Groenewald wrote:
Does it matter for the PPA? Isn't that installed in a fixed location
anyway?
Yes, changes to this it is what broke the PPA since 6.9.
Sorry, I didn't understand to what you answered "yes". Is the PPA
installed in a fixed location? If so, *you*
On 2016-02-04 13:02, Jan Groenewald wrote:
Is it difficult because of legacy code?
No, it's difficult because Sage is like a distribution.
Relocating Sage is like relocating /usr to /otherpath/usr in your
favorite Linux distro. I bet things will break down completely.
Jeroen.
--
You receive
Hi
On 4 February 2016 at 13:42, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2016-02-04 12:32, Jan Groenewald wrote:
>
>> Is there any plan to support this in future?
>>
> I don't think so. This used to be semi-supported in the past (before Sage
> 7.0), but it is too difficult to do correctly.
>
I'm under the im
Hi
This should be fixed by 7.0.1 or 7.1.
In the meantime use the larger version
sudo apt-get install sagemath-upstream-binary-full
Regards,
Jan
On 4 February 2016 at 11:28, Marcin M. wrote:
> The log follows:
>
> $ sudo apt-get install sagemath-upstream-binary
>> Reading package lists... Don
The log follows:
$ sudo apt-get install sagemath-upstream-binary
> Reading package lists... Done
> Building dependency tree
> Reading state information... Done
> Recommended packages:
> gfortran dvipng texlive
> The following NEW packages will be installed:
> sagemath-upstream-binary
>
Hi
On 4 February 2016 at 12:20, HG wrote:
> Following the ppa sage link, I tried to install sage-7, it works fine.
> Time for patching, but no problem.
> I use two version of sagemath the ppa and developer one (which I compile)
> and after I compile sagemanifolds (which I can't do at the moment
Following the ppa sage link, I tried to install sage-7, it works fine. Time
for patching, but no problem.
I use two version of sagemath the ppa and developer one (which I compile)
and after I compile sagemanifolds (which I can't do at the moment with the
ppa because it's installed system-wide).
36 matches
Mail list logo
