Re: [sage-devel] Re: [SPAM: 9.600] Fwd: [sage-trac] #10295: Upgrading pexpect

I can do that. I’ll see what’s involved for sage-on-gentoo I may be able to deploy it there first. François > On 16/10/2015, at 15:29, Bill Page wrote: > > The version of pexpect with the new option is still a branch called > > https://github.com/pexpect/pexpect/tree/superfluous-sleep > > I t

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [SPAM: 9.600] Fwd: [sage-trac] #10295: Upgrading pexpect

The version of pexpect with the new option is still a branch called https://github.com/pexpect/pexpect/tree/superfluous-sleep I think they are waiting for us to say that it works with Sage. Sorry, I really dont understand what is required in order to update a branch on git.sagemath.org

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [SPAM: 9.600] Fwd: [sage-trac] #10295: Upgrading pexpect

On 10/16/15 14:29, kcrisman wrote: Though I guess one would have to upgrade sagenb and pexpect simultaneously? You got that part right, it will have to be simultaneous. Bill can you update the branch for a version with the commit in question included? Is it even released yet? Francois -- You

[sage-devel] Re: [SPAM: 9.600] Fwd: [sage-trac] #10295: Upgrading pexpect

> I'll go further: pexpect 3.3 (with patch) has been used in > sage-on-gentoo for a while now. One of the missing piece is that we need > a matching patch in sagenb which potentially means a new release of > sagenb. > I don't know the current development status (or lack thereof) of sagenb >

[sage-devel] Re: [SPAM: 9.600] Fwd: [sage-trac] #10295: Upgrading pexpect

I'll go further: pexpect 3.3 (with patch) has been used in sage-on-gentoo for a while now. One of the missing piece is that we need a matching patch in sagenb which potentially means a new release of sagenb. I don't know the current development status (or lack thereof) of sagenb these days. Fra