Re: [sage-devel] Sage runs in Window's 10's new Unix subsystem

Hi again, thanks to the insight. I managed to successfully run sage in WSL. notebook(automatic_login='False') triggered indeed a different reaction, but again did not work. The trick was to run bash on ubuntu on windows as administrator and run sage. Afterwards all seem to work even without

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Aliases

On Wed, 14 Dec 2016, Peleg Michaeli wrote: OK then, I'll simply add aliases in the docstrings (however, note that there are places in sage with such aliases, such as `am = adjacency_matrix`). Yes, there are. And I think they should be mostly deprecated and later deleted. /Except something

[sage-devel] Re: Aliases

OK then, I'll simply add aliases in the docstrings (however, note that there are places in sage with such aliases, such as `am = adjacency_matrix`). On Thursday, 8 December 2016 00:17:07 UTC+2, Sébastien Labbé wrote: > > > I dunno. Aliases are a source of ambiguity and confusion -- my advice

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Our current git doesn't build anymore with recent (>=1.1) openSSL

This is now Trac#22058 . Advice requested about what to upgrade to : 2.10.2 is abou 11 weeks old, 2.11.0 about two weeks old, and might be judged a bit wet behind the ears ; OTOH, it has been probably checked against openssl's newfangled version. For

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Our current git doesn't build anymore with recent (>=1.1) openSSL

On 15/12/16 11:36, Dima Pasechnik wrote: except that this makes it unclear how one can ship a fully functioning (with SSL) Sage binary on OSX that does not depend on system git being available (and the latter I presume needs Xcode). I'll admit that I cannot check that right now. In fact I am

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Our current git doesn't build anymore with recent (>=1.1) openSSL

On Wednesday, December 14, 2016 at 10:30:14 PM UTC, François wrote: > > On 15/12/16 11:17, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > IIRC, Sage's current git also does not build on OSX properly, and this > > was also related to SSL. > > I'd open a ticket to upgrade to the current stable git (2.10.2, I >

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Our current git doesn't build anymore with recent (>=1.1) openSSL

On 15/12/16 11:17, Dima Pasechnik wrote: IIRC, Sage's current git also does not build on OSX properly, and this was also related to SSL. I'd open a ticket to upgrade to the current stable git (2.10.2, I guess). Definitely. You are encouraged to open a ticket. And yes some OS X problem are

[sage-devel] Re: Our current git doesn't build anymore with recent (>=1.1) openSSL

IIRC, Sage's current git also does not build on OSX properly, and this was also related to SSL. I'd open a ticket to upgrade to the current stable git (2.10.2, I guess). On Wednesday, December 14, 2016 at 10:05:09 PM UTC, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: > > On my way to understant what can and

[sage-devel] Our current git doesn't build anymore with recent (>=1.1) openSSL

On my way to understant what can and cannot be done with R (this needing a "bare" VM to test difficulties avoided by system's software), I stumbled on a nice one : our current git (2.6.2) no longer compiles against a recent openSSL distribution. It seems that the recently crash-released 1.1

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage Windows Installer (take 2b)

> I replaced the existing binary with a new one at BRAVO! All works fine. (only plot() gives no output) Peter -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage Windows Installer (take 2b)

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 6:12 PM, Erik Bray wrote: > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Peter Luschny > wrote: >>> Please give this new build a try: >>> >>> https://github.com/embray/sage-windows/releases/download/0.1a3-7.4/SageMath-7.4.exe >>> >>>

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage Windows Installer (take 2b)

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Peter Luschny wrote: >> Please give this new build a try: >> >> https://github.com/embray/sage-windows/releases/download/0.1a3-7.4/SageMath-7.4.exe >> >> This was built incorporating the fixes pointed out by Dima for Givaro >> and

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage Windows Installer (take 2b)

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > Hi Erik, > > there are bugs in 7.4 (which is the version your Windows version is based > on, right?) > that break SAGE_FAT_BINARY. > See https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21850 and > https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21849

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage Windows Installer (take 2b)

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 2:48 PM, mmarco wrote: > If you provide several binaries, I think it would be wise to advertise the > lowest common denominator as the "standard" one, so it works for every > user. Indeed--it would be the default, most prominently advertised one. More

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage Windows Installer (take 2b)

If you provide several binaries, I think it would be wise to advertise the lowest common denominator as the "standard" one, so it works for every user. El miércoles, 14 de diciembre de 2016, 12:59:13 (UTC+1), Erik Bray escribió: > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 12:47 PM, Erik Bray

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage Windows Installer (take 2b)

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 12:47 PM, Erik Bray wrote: > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Dima Pasechnik wrote: >> Hi Erik, >> >> there are bugs in 7.4 (which is the version your Windows version is based >> on, right?) >> that break SAGE_FAT_BINARY. >> See

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage Windows Installer (take 2b)

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > Hi Erik, > > there are bugs in 7.4 (which is the version your Windows version is based > on, right?) > that break SAGE_FAT_BINARY. > See https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21850 and > https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21849

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage Windows Installer (take 2b)

Hi Erik, there are bugs in 7.4 (which is the version your Windows version is based on, right?) that break SAGE_FAT_BINARY. See https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21850 and https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21849 and https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21772 Did you backport these? Dima On

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage Windows Installer (take 2b)

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Peter Luschny wrote: >> Could you tell me what kind of CPU you have? And remind me, was this >> running in a VM (it shouldn't matter but I'm curious)? > > > No, no, it ran on bare iron. Okay, so there are at least a few instructions my

[sage-devel] Re: Cross-type comparisons

Jeroen Demeyer wrote: >> Does Element.__richcmp__() (via CoercionModel_cache_maps.richcmp()) >> really need to fall back on comparing by type/id when no common >> parent is found? > > No. As far as I know, It does so for historical reasons only. I am in > favour of making elements without a

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage Windows Installer (take 2b)

> > Could you tell me what kind of CPU you have? And remind me, was this > running in a VM (it shouldn't matter but I'm curious)? > No, no, it ran on bare iron. Peter -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this

[sage-devel] Re: search in sage docs says "[Object object]"

2016-12-14 00:09:50 UTC+1, William: > search in Sage docs says "[object Object]" Not sure what is causing that. Regarding "algebraic_dependency", search for "algdep". https://www.google.fr/search?q=algdep+sagemath -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage Windows Installer (take 2b)

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 1:23 AM, Peter Luschny wrote: > Same problem as last time -- dead kernel: "The kernel has died, > and the automatic restart has failed." New message: > "Saving untrusted notebook". Untrusted notebook, what is this? Hmm, that's too bad. Though it