Re: [sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries?

2013-04-23 Thread David Kirkby
On 23 April 2013 14:45, leif wrote: > IMHO it's better to tell people they should build from source than offering > potentially broken bdists. [We already get enough error reports for the > Linux bdists, although a couple simply due to distro mismatches, i.e., > people trying to run them on diff

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries?

2013-04-23 Thread Jeroen Demeyer
On 04/23/2013 03:45 PM, leif wrote: IMHO it's better to tell people they should build from source than offering potentially broken bdists. At least, it's considered a bug if the bdist is broken. But it's true that we never really test bdists. -- You received this message because you are subscr

[sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries?

2013-04-23 Thread leif
Robert Bradshaw wrote: On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 8:42 AM, leif wrote: William Stein wrote: On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 5:33 AM, leif mailto:not.rea...@online.de>> wrote: People promised a couple of times (last time early this year IIRC) that t2 (i.e., a SPARC) will come back... t2 will

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries?

2013-04-22 Thread Robert Bradshaw
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 8:42 AM, leif wrote: > William Stein wrote: >> >> On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 5:33 AM, leif > > wrote: >> >> Jeroen Demeyer wrote: >> >> On 04/20/2013 12:14 PM, Julien Puydt wrote: >> >> Le 20/04/2013 10:29, Jeroen Demeyer a

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries?

2013-04-22 Thread Harald Schilly
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > The current version of the Solaris build is NONE. > which is quite confusing. I tried to catch this with a SSI-"if" check, but it didn't work and i let it be. Tried it again right now, it works in the opposite way. no idea why ;-) It's als

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries?

2013-04-22 Thread Jeroen Demeyer
Also, the page http://www.sagemath.org/download.html still talks about Solaris binaries. -- 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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@go

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries?

2013-04-22 Thread Jeroen Demeyer
On 04/20/2013 05:42 PM, leif wrote: I would probably keep the directory / page though, with just a README explaining that we still (intend to) support Solaris on x86 and SPARC (and regularly test on these platforms), but simply do no longer offer binary distributions of Sage for these. Sounds go

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries?

2013-04-21 Thread David Kirkby
On 20 April 2013 13:33, leif wrote: > People promised a couple of times (last time early this year IIRC) that t2 > (i.e., a SPARC) will come back... > > For x86[_64], we may ask Dave whether he would want us to build binaries on > hawk. > > > -leif I have no objection to building binaries on haw

[sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries?

2013-04-20 Thread Harald Schilly
On Saturday, April 20, 2013 5:42:45 PM UTC+2, leif wrote: > > I would probably keep the directory / page though, with just a README > explaining that we still (intend to) support Solaris on x86 and SPARC > (and regularly test on these platforms), but simply do no longer offer > binary distributi

[sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries?

2013-04-20 Thread Jean-Pierre Flori
Le samedi 20 avril 2013 17:42:45 UTC+2, leif a écrit : > > William Stein wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 5:33 AM, leif > > > wrote: > > > > Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > > > > On 04/20/2013 12:14 PM, Julien Puydt wrote: > > > > Le 20/04/20

[sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries?

2013-04-20 Thread leif
William Stein wrote: On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 5:33 AM, leif mailto:not.rea...@online.de>> wrote: Jeroen Demeyer wrote: On 04/20/2013 12:14 PM, Julien Puydt wrote: Le 20/04/2013 10:29, Jeroen Demeyer a écrit : I propose to complete remove the page

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries?

2013-04-20 Thread William Stein
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 5:33 AM, leif wrote: > Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > >> On 04/20/2013 12:14 PM, Julien Puydt wrote: >> >>> Le 20/04/2013 10:29, Jeroen Demeyer a écrit : >>> I propose to complete remove the page http://www.sagemath.org/**download-solaris.html

[sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries?

2013-04-20 Thread leif
Jeroen Demeyer wrote: On 04/20/2013 12:14 PM, Julien Puydt wrote: Le 20/04/2013 10:29, Jeroen Demeyer a écrit : I propose to complete remove the page http://www.sagemath.org/download-solaris.html since one might conclude that Sage versions laters than Sage 4.7 don't support Solaris, which is co

[sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries?

2013-04-20 Thread Harald Schilly
I'm in favour of that, this page hasn't been maintained at all – it's just "correct" as far as I know. This would also imply to get rid of the ancient binaries (and the solaris entry) from the mirrors, right? H On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > I propose to complete remov

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries.

2010-02-03 Thread Minh Nguyen
Hi David, On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 4:21 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote: > http://www.sagemath.org/doc/installation/source.html > > also needs updating, as it says Ticket #8175 tracks this issue: http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8175 -- Regards Minh Van Nguyen -- To post to this group,

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries.

2010-02-03 Thread Harald Schilly
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 18:21, Dr. David Kirkby wrote: > http://www.sagemath.org/doc/installation/source.html > > also needs updating, ... That's the Sage documentation -> hence trac (component: documentation) ticket + patch > I'd like to ask on comp.unix.solaris to get some others to try Sage,

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries.

2010-02-03 Thread Dr. David Kirkby
Harald Schilly wrote: On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 17:36, Dr. David Kirkby wrote: yes, and i'll remove both 3.4.2 toolchain files, ok? Yes, I think they are pretty useless. I think that too, but I ask to be sure ;) I'm also adding links to the two solaris wiki pages on the download page on the mir

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries.

2010-02-03 Thread Harald Schilly
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 17:36, Dr. David Kirkby wrote: >> yes, and i'll remove both 3.4.2 toolchain files, ok? > Yes, I think they are pretty useless. I think that too, but I ask to be sure ;) I'm also adding links to the two solaris wiki pages on the download page on the mirrors. Consider it done

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries.

2010-02-03 Thread Dr. David Kirkby
Harald Schilly wrote: On Feb 3, 12:24 pm, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote: sage-4.3.0.1-Solaris-10-SPARC-sun4u-or-sun4v.tar.7z yes, and i'll remove both 3.4.2 toolchain files, ok? H Yes, I think they are pretty useless. I know for a fact they have Micheal's paths hard-coded in them, so I think t

[sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries.

2010-02-03 Thread Harald Schilly
On Feb 3, 12:24 pm, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote: > sage-4.3.0.1-Solaris-10-SPARC-sun4u-or-sun4v.tar.7z yes, and i'll remove both 3.4.2 toolchain files, ok? H -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubsc

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries.

2010-02-03 Thread Dr. David Kirkby
Harald Schilly wrote: On Feb 3, 11:14 am, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote: I have updated the Sage website to account for the Sage 4.3.0.1 source and binary tarballs. Where - I can't find them! Mirroring is broken because they have shut down the master server days ago without telling anything and h

[sage-devel] Re: Solaris binaries.

2010-02-03 Thread Harald Schilly
On Feb 3, 11:14 am, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote: > > I have updated the Sage website to account for the Sage 4.3.0.1 source > > and binary tarballs. > > Where - I can't find them! Mirroring is broken because they have shut down the master server days ago without telling anything and hence it is impo