On Sep 9, 7:00 pm, kcrisman wrote:
> On Sep 9, 12:40 pm, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> > On 2010-09-09 14:48, kcrisman wrote:> sage:
> > > Exiting Sage (CPU time 0m0.28s, Wall time 0m3.25s).
> > > Exiting spawned GP/PARI interpreter process.
>
> > > Note the last line. This is repeatable. Do we r
Hi,
built successful and almost all test passed (ptestlong) on AMD Phenom
X4 II, Fedora 13
one test failed, this is related to
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9847
Georg
On Sep 7, 12:09 pm, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> Hello sage-devel,
>
> As far as we know, there are no more remaini
On Sep 9, 12:40 pm, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2010-09-09 14:48, kcrisman wrote:> sage:
> > Exiting Sage (CPU time 0m0.28s, Wall time 0m3.25s).
> > Exiting spawned GP/PARI interpreter process.
>
> > Note the last line. This is repeatable. Do we really want this? We
> > do get an exit of a spa
On 2010-09-09 14:48, kcrisman wrote:
> sage:
> Exiting Sage (CPU time 0m0.28s, Wall time 0m3.25s).
> Exiting spawned GP/PARI interpreter process.
>
> Note the last line. This is repeatable. Do we really want this? We
> do get an exit of a spawned GAP process when one moves Sage to a new
> locat
Builds ok after all on PPC OS X 10.4 (whew!) - to test would overload
things too much for what I need it for now.
However, I noticed something weird:
Dasher-03:~/Desktop/sage-4.6.prealpha4 student$ ./sage
--
| Sage Version 4.6.pr
On 09/ 9/10 09:53 AM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
On 2010-09-08 22:05, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Could you build it in a number of times in a loop and let us know if it
ever fails.
I built it 100 times (without SAGE_CHECK) and it was successful every time.
I think given that, and even the person th
On 2010-09-08 22:05, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
> Could you build it in a number of times in a loop and let us know if it
> ever fails.
I built it 100 times (without SAGE_CHECK) and it was successful every time.
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe f
On 09/ 8/10 08:44 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
On 2010-09-08 21:33, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
If there's a bug in the code which means it will never build on OS X
10.4, then that's another issue.
I tested sage-4.6.prealpha4 (based on sage-4.5.3, so it includes the GSL
update) on a PPC OS X 10.4 and
On Sep 8, 3:44 pm, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2010-09-08 21:33, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
>
> > If there's a bug in the code which means it will never build on OS X
> > 10.4, then that's another issue.
>
> I tested sage-4.6.prealpha4 (based on sage-4.5.3, so it includes the GSL
> update) on a PPC
On 2010-09-08 21:33, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
> If there's a bug in the code which means it will never build on OS X
> 10.4, then that's another issue.
I tested sage-4.6.prealpha4 (based on sage-4.5.3, so it includes the GSL
update) on a PPC OS X 10.4 and all tests were successful (make testlong).
On 09/ 8/10 07:26 PM, mhampton wrote:
Yes, I would guess this is related to
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9533
Looks like that spkg was really well tested in general, but not on a
OS X 10.4 machine. Unfortunately I don't have one available.
-Marshall
Yes,
The GSL update was well
On 2010-09-08 17:29, John H Palmieri wrote:
> +++ [BUG] Total bench for gp-sta is 3288122
> +++ [BUG] Total bench for gp-dyn is 3363785
>
> PROBLEMS WERE NOTED. The following files list them in diff format:
> Directory: /scratch/palmieri/sage-4.6.prealpha4/spkg/build/
> pari-2.4.3.svn-12577.p5/src
Yes, I would guess this is related to
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9533
Looks like that spkg was really well tested in general, but not on a
OS X 10.4 machine. Unfortunately I don't have one available.
-Marshall
On Sep 8, 12:45 pm, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2010-09-08 14:50, kcri
On 2010-09-08 14:50, kcrisman wrote:
> Mac OS X 10.4 with 512 MB memory, 700 MHz PPC
>
> fails at GSL (this machine built and passed nearly all tests with
> 4.5.2):
I doubt that this has to do with the PARI upgrade (as far as I know, GSL
does not depend on PARI). Does sage-4.5.3 build on that mac
Following your instructions, all tests passed on two 64-bit linux
machines (they have quite different processors, one is an 8-core intel
i7 860, the other a dual core intel e8400).
-Marshall Hampton
On Sep 7, 5:09 am, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> Hello sage-devel,
>
> As far as we know, there are no
On Sep 7, 3:09 am, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> Hello sage-devel,
>
> As far as we know, there are no more remaining issues for the PARI
> update (#9343). We haven't had any doctest failures for a while now.
> The main issues recently have been with PARI not compiling properly on
> various machines, b
Mac OS X 10.4 with 512 MB memory, 700 MHz PPC
fails at GSL (this machine built and passed nearly all tests with
4.5.2):
libtool: link: ar cru .libs/libgslintegration.a .libs/qk15.o .libs/
qk21.o .libs/qk31.o .libs/qk41.o .libs/qk51.o .libs/qk61.o .libs/
qk.o .libs/qng.o .libs/qag.o .libs/qags.o .
Debian 64-bit on an intel core-duo
compiles without problems and passes all doctests. The test wheree
made with only two threads.
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For m
18 matches
Mail list logo
