[sage-devel] Re: Build did not work 4.3.5 Ubuntu 9.10 (atlas-3.8.3.p12)

2010-04-17 Thread Bruce Cohen
Saturday morning update: SUCCESS! Installing the 64-bit Ubuntu did the trick. Now if only I can get my scanner to work ... Sage is a truly great community. Thanks. -Bruce On Apr 16, 10:16 am, Bruce Cohen math.co...@gmail.com wrote: A status report: Last yesterday's build died with ATLAS

[sage-devel] Re: Build did not work 4.3.5 Ubuntu 9.10 (atlas-3.8.3.p12)

2010-04-16 Thread Bruce Cohen
A status report: Last yesterday's build died with ATLAS -- this time on a truly quiet machine. I tried again with a make clean export SAGE_FAT_BINARY=yes make but that also died with ATLAS. -Bruce On Apr 15, 10:40 am, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu wrote: On Apr 15, 2010, at

[sage-devel] Re: Build did not work 4.3.5 Ubuntu 9.10 (atlas-3.8.3.p12)

2010-04-16 Thread Jason Grout
On 04/16/2010 12:16 PM, Bruce Cohen wrote: A status report: Last yesterday's build died with ATLAS -- this time on a truly quiet machine. I tried again with a make clean export SAGE_FAT_BINARY=yes make but that also died with ATLAS. -Bruce Here are two other things to try: 1. Download

[sage-devel] Re: Build did not work 4.3.5 Ubuntu 9.10 (atlas-3.8.3.p12)

2010-04-16 Thread Jason Grout
On 04/16/2010 12:50 PM, Jason Grout wrote: Note to everyone: the newest version of atlas is 3.9.23, while our version is 3.8.3 (p12). On the surface, it looks like our ATLAS is way out of date. Maybe we should upgrade anyway? Does anyone know of problems with upgrading? Never mind. I see

[sage-devel] Re: Build did not work 4.3.5 Ubuntu 9.10 (atlas-3.8.3.p12)

2010-04-16 Thread Bruce Cohen
On Apr 16, 10:50 am, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote: What kind of i7 do you have?  I have a quad core i7 920 that I compile Sage on just fine.  I'm running 64-bit Ubuntu 9.10, though. I have a quad core i7 860. I had been hesitant to try 64-bit because of problems with Java

[sage-devel] Re: Build did not work 4.3.5 Ubuntu 9.10 (atlas-3.8.3.p12)

2010-04-16 Thread Jason Grout
On 04/16/2010 01:14 PM, Bruce Cohen wrote: On Apr 16, 10:50 am, Jason Groutjason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote: What kind of i7 do you have? I have a quad core i7 920 that I compile Sage on just fine. I'm running 64-bit Ubuntu 9.10, though. I have a quad core i7 860. I had been hesitant

[sage-devel] Re: Build did not work 4.3.5 Ubuntu 9.10 (atlas-3.8.3.p12)

2010-04-15 Thread Bruce Cohen
The job ran overnight and nothing else was going on. Perhaps I should try again tonight. -Bruce On Apr 14, 11:18 pm, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu wrote: On Apr 14, 2010, at 11:12 PM, Bruce Cohen wrote: I have a new machine with Ubuntu 9.10 (32 bit).   My first build of

[sage-devel] Re: Build did not work 4.3.5 Ubuntu 9.10 (atlas-3.8.3.p12)

2010-04-15 Thread Bruce Cohen
I now remember that I did have a 5 hour scp file transfer running that night. It is a brand new machine, so I was bringing over a tar file from an old machine on my network. I will try again tonight. It is disappointing that that the new quad core i7 (purchased to do Sage work) could not handle

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Build did not work 4.3.5 Ubuntu 9.10 (atlas-3.8.3.p12)

2010-04-15 Thread John Cremona
Atlas is supposed to find out what sort of processor your machine has automatically and then use tuning data for that. But it is not perfect at detecting the processor type, so then it goess of to do this tuning stuff which takes hours. The same happened to me when I got a new laptop in 2008.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Build did not work 4.3.5 Ubuntu 9.10 (atlas-3.8.3.p12)

2010-04-15 Thread William Stein
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 9:37 AM, John Cremona john.crem...@gmail.com wrote: Atlas is supposed to find out what sort of processor your machine has automatically and then use tuning data for that.  But it is not perfect at detecting the processor type, so then it goess of to do this tuning stuff

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Build did not work 4.3.5 Ubuntu 9.10 (atlas-3.8.3.p12)

2010-04-15 Thread Robert Bradshaw
On Apr 15, 2010, at 9:28 AM, Bruce Cohen wrote: I now remember that I did have a 5 hour scp file transfer running that night. It is a brand new machine, so I was bringing over a tar file from an old machine on my network. I will try again tonight. It is disappointing that that the new quad