Jeroen Demeyer writes:
> All of you who had trouble with building Sage from source inside a
> VirtualBox:
>
> please test new source tarball at
> http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/release/sage-5.0.1.rc0/sage-5.0.1.rc0.tar
Now that I'm back in Singapore I've tested this with 5.0.1 in my
Virtua
On Jun 7, 9:01 pm, Keshav Kini wrote:
> Anthony Wickstead writes:
> > Using 64 bit Ubuntu 12.04 inside VirtualBox 4.14 under Windows 7, I was
> > able to
> > make sage-5.0.1.rc0 with no errors.
>
> What hardware CPU does your computer have?
Intel Core i5-2520M @ 2.50GHz
>
> > Running ./sage
On Friday, 8 June 2012 10:42:58 UTC+2, Volker Braun wrote:
>
> 0. This thread is about building Sage in a virtual machine, not using the
> pre-made VM image
>
> 1. Its 7G. Harald, can you change this on the web page?
>
> 2. Yes. You can use your host browser (http://localhost:8000) to download
0. This thread is about building Sage in a virtual machine, not using the
pre-made VM image
1. Its 7G. Harald, can you change this on the web page?
2. Yes. You can use your host browser (http://localhost:8000) to download
and re-upload your worksheets. Obviously a better solution needs to be
f
On Thursday, May 31, 2012 12:04:47 AM UTC+8, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> All of you who had trouble with building Sage from source inside a
> VirtualBox:
>
> please test new source tarball at
>
> http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/release/sage-5.0.1.rc0/sage-5.0.1.rc0.tar
Can I get some cla
Anthony Wickstead writes:
> Using 64 bit Ubuntu 12.04 inside VirtualBox 4.14 under Windows 7, I was able
> to
> make sage-5.0.1.rc0 with no errors.
What hardware CPU does your computer have?
> Running ./sage –testall resulted in just one error:
>
> Sage –t –force_lib “devel/sage/sage/schemes/pl
Using 64 bit Ubuntu 12.04 inside VirtualBox 4.14 under Windows 7, I was
able to make sage-5.0.1.rc0 with no errors.
Running ./sage –testall resulted in just one error:
Sage –t –force_lib “devel/sage/sage/schemes/plane_curves/curve.py”
Tony Wickstead
--
To post to this group, send an emai
On May 30, 10:04 am, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> All of you who had trouble with building Sage from source inside a
> VirtualBox:
>
> please test new source tarball
> athttp://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/release/sage-5.0.1.rc0/sage-5.0...
Built and all tests passed using 'make ptestlong'. This
On Monday, February 6, 2012 3:23:13 AM UTC-8, Emil Widmann wrote:
>
> > VBscript is an ugly abomination, nobody in his right mind will
> voluntarily
> > use it.
> Lots of people (windows folks) use it even voluntarily
They even use Windows voluntarily ;-)
My first thought was it might be over
> disagrees with the current behavior of
> `sage -upgrade`, which tries to merge any committed changes into the
> new version you're upgrading to. That doesn't make sense IMO but there
> you are.
Do avoid another misunderstanding:
Of course I don't suggest that sage -upgrade should have a differe
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 20:03, mmarco wrote:
> I have little experience with pyqt, and i am not sure that would be
> the way to go. A windows user that would want to use a pyqt program
> would need to have installed in his system: python, pyqt and qt. The
> offline windows installer of qt is 1.3 gi
I have little experience with pyqt, and i am not sure that would be
the way to go. A windows user that would want to use a pyqt program
would need to have installed in his system: python, pyqt and qt. The
offline windows installer of qt is 1.3 gigs. That's overkill for a
simple gui app. There must
> A launcher written in Python could be used on other OS'es, too.
good point
> VBscript is an ugly abomination, nobody in his right mind will voluntarily
> use it.
Lots of people (windows folks) use it even voluntarily - I will not
speculate on their (or my) state of mind ...
>Not to mention that
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 17:20, Emil Widmann wrote:
> I think the unionfs is a well tested technology now, but a clean
> solution would be that in case of such an replacement/upgrade of the
> sage squashfs the whole sage directory tree in the save directory is
> deleted too - then the user starts wi
On Monday, February 6, 2012 1:20:13 AM UTC-8, Emil Widmann wrote:
>
> Why not use VBscript or precompile it? Distribution of binaries on
> windows should be no problem.
>
A launcher written in Python could be used on other OS'es, too. And
VBscript is an ugly abomination, nobody in his right min
@mmarco
>I use unionfs to mix the squashed filesystem with a directory to save
>the changes. Maybe that would be a source of errors if somebody makes
>changes in his sage directory and then upgrade by replacing the
>compressed file.
I think the unionfs is a well tested technology now, but a clean
s
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Volker Braun wrote:
> On Sunday, February 5, 2012 2:59:40 AM UTC-8, Emil Widmann wrote:
>>
>> About those other parts: Really, the Interface from the windows side
>> has a lot of potential. All this stuff typical windows users expect
>> when installing new software
On Sunday, February 5, 2012 2:59:40 AM UTC-8, Emil Widmann wrote:
>
> About those other parts: Really, the Interface from the windows side
> has a lot of potential. All this stuff typical windows users expect
> when installing new software like desktop icons, menu entries,
> installer, on screen
On Feb 5, 12:23 pm, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> On Sunday, 5 February 2012 18:08:46 UTC+8, mmarco wrote:
>
> > On 5 feb, 09:30, Volker Braun wrote:
> > > I think thats all premature optimization. First we need a bulletproof
> > way
> > > of running Sage in the VM. At the end we can still worry abou
On Sunday, 5 February 2012 18:08:46 UTC+8, mmarco wrote:
>
> On 5 feb, 09:30, Volker Braun wrote:
> > I think thats all premature optimization. First we need a bulletproof
> way
> > of running Sage in the VM. At the end we can still worry about ways to
> > shave off another megabyte or two.
On Feb 5, 8:30 am, Volker Braun wrote:
> I think thats all premature optimization. First we need a bulletproof way
> of running Sage in the VM.
I agree - "premature optimization, the root of all evil". In fact the
VM itself is just one module of the interface and it is definitely far
better devel
On 5 feb, 09:30, Volker Braun wrote:
> I think thats all premature optimization. First we need a bulletproof way
> of running Sage in the VM. At the end we can still worry about ways to
> shave off another megabyte or two. Most VM questions I got were about how
> to add more stuff to the VM within
> A more technical detail - I am curious:
> How to you allow persistant changes to the sage directory in the
> compressed filesystem? Do you plan to use an overlayed filesystem with
> a persistant savefile? Or do you have the sage directories just as
> read only?
> cheers
I use unionfs to mix the
I think thats all premature optimization. First we need a bulletproof way
of running Sage in the VM. At the end we can still worry about ways to
shave off another megabyte or two. Most VM questions I got were about how
to add more stuff to the VM within its space constraints. Nobody had an
issu
On Feb 4, 8:25 pm, mmarco wrote:
> I have been working on a VM with compressed filesystems. I have
> thought that maybe a good aproach to the "automatic generation"
> problem would be to mount the sage directory from a compressed file in
> a shared folder. It should need, as William sugested, a wi
I have been working on a VM with compressed filesystems. I have
thought that maybe a good aproach to the "automatic generation"
problem would be to mount the sage directory from a compressed file in
a shared folder. It should need, as William sugested, a windows GUI
app that would take care of conf
> perhaps instead of opening a browser in VM, we should rather open a
> terminal window there, maybe with Sage started?
This is exactly the current solution (The version which we currently
distribute).
The whole discussion is about improving the Out of the Box experience,
where especially the 1st
perhaps instead of opening a browser in VM, we should rather open a
terminal window there, maybe with Sage started? Then the user might do
notebook() there and try accessing sagenb from the browser on the host
system.
For the 1st run, this should be OK, IMHO.
How to customize the subsequent runs
On Jan 13, 6:05 pm, mmarco wrote:
> Working in my own VM, i have noticed a problem of the "browser inside
> the VM" aproach: keyboard layout. Is there a way to make VirtualBox
> use the host layout inside the guest?
With my current VM (Live CD) I had a flag that brings up a menu to
choose locals
Working in my own VM, i have noticed a problem of the "browser inside
the VM" aproach: keyboard layout. Is there a way to make VirtualBox
use the host layout inside the guest?
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
Emil was referring to the VM that we currently distribute by "current
solution", not the experimental one that I made for this thread. The new
one has the browser running inside the VM window. I think I fixed the
networking issue, I'll make another alpha version next week or so.
--
To post to
On Friday, 13 January 2012 18:22:33 UTC+8, Emil Widmann wrote:
>
> > Do you mean that one cannot run Virtual Box without X11?
> > I'd imagine if it were possible one can just run the sagenb server
> there,
> > and
> > use the browser on the host system only.
>
> The discussion goes in circle
> Do you mean that one cannot run Virtual Box without X11?
> I'd imagine if it were possible one can just run the sagenb server there,
> and
> use the browser on the host system only.
The discussion goes in circles ;-)
Running the Vm without X and accessing it from the host-browser is the
current
On Friday, 13 January 2012 06:40:18 UTC+8, Keshav Kini wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 06:27, mmarco wrote:
> > On 12 ene, 16:38, Volker Braun wrote:
> >> I've configured the window manager to the bare minimum. Ideally we'd run
> >> without a wm but that seems to break VirtualBox seamless mo
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 06:27, mmarco wrote:
> On 12 ene, 16:38, Volker Braun wrote:
>> I've configured the window manager to the bare minimum. Ideally we'd run
>> without a wm but that seems to break VirtualBox seamless mode. We should
>> also disable moving and minimizing the browser window ins
On 12 ene, 16:38, Volker Braun wrote:
> password is always "sage"
>
> I've configured the window manager to the bare minimum. Ideally we'd run
> without a wm but that seems to break VirtualBox seamless mode. We should
> also disable moving and minimizing the browser window inside the VM.
Maybe ju
password is always "sage"
I've configured the window manager to the bare minimum. Ideally we'd run
without a wm but that seems to break VirtualBox seamless mode. We should
also disable moving and minimizing the browser window inside the VM.
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel
On Thursday, 12 January 2012 04:48:39 UTC+8, Volker Braun wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> > Somehow, I expected I could run the notebook server in the VM and
> connect to
> > it from the host system, but I don't see a way to do it.
>
> You should be able to
It works for me. Since it doesn't work for everybody I'm assuming that
VirtualBox presents different bios names for the nic, perhaps depending on
the version. I'll change the VM to fix that.
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, s
In fact, i get that only the lo interface is up in the guest system. I
think that explains the problem.
--
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 more options, visit this gro
Volker, can you access the sage notebook from the host using your last
VM? I can't.
--
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 more options, visit this group at http://groups.
On Wednesday, January 11, 2012 3:52:37 PM UTC-5, William wrote:
>
> To make sure we are on the same page: have you used VMware much?
>
I haven't. Whenever I wanted to give it a try I eventually found out that
my kernel is too new for VMware.
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-deve
On Wednesday, January 11, 2012, Volker Braun wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Dima Pasechnik
wrote:
>> Somehow, I expected I could run the notebook server in the VM and
connect to
>> it from the host system, but I don't see a way to do it.
> You should be able to connect from the host t
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> Somehow, I expected I could run the notebook server in the VM and connect
to
> it from the host system, but I don't see a way to do it.
You should be able to connect from the host to the guest port t(ssh
into the virtual machine) an
The port forwarding seems to be well configured in Volker's VM (the
same configuration works fine in otyher VM's), but i don't know why it
does not work. Maybe something isn't right in the guest system?
Volker, are you sure that your guets system is listening to ssh
connections, and that it accept
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> Settings->System->Acceleration way worked (I also needed to set the # of
> CPUs to 1). (For BIOS settings I need to go the the office and attach a
> monitor to the box :-))
>
> Somehow, I expected I could run the notebook server in the VM a
Settings->System->Acceleration way worked (I also needed to set the # of
CPUs to 1). (For BIOS settings I need to go the the office and attach a
monitor to the box :-))
Somehow, I expected I could run the notebook server in the VM and connect
to it from the host system, but I don't see a way to
On 11 Jan., 16:56, Volker Braun wrote:
> The virtual machine has hardware virtualization support enabled. You can
> probably switch on HW virtualization in the BIOS of your computer, which is
> recommended if you do any virtualization. You can also disable it in the
> settings of the virtual machi
The virtual machine has hardware virtualization support enabled. You can
probably switch on HW virtualization in the BIOS of your computer, which is
recommended if you do any virtualization. You can also disable it in the
settings of the virtual machine (Settings->System->Acceleration) at a
sli
I tried running this on a Windows 7 (64-bits), using Virtual Box 4.1.8.
I imported the ova file with the default settings, but the thing fails to
start,
saying
"Failed to open a session for VM...,
VT-x features locked on unavailable in MSR
(VERR_VMX_MSR_LOCKED_OR_DISABLED)"
What am I doing wro
I have tried the new VM from Volker (on a linux host), and the guest
browser works fine, but i can't connect from a host browser. Somebody
else noticed this?
As for the shared folders, i think it would be a good idea to include
a dialog in Emil's installer to configure them after the .ova image is
On Wednesday, January 11, 2012 11:26:43 AM UTC+8, Benjamin Jones wrote:
>
> After a minute or two I couldn't figure out how to save a worksheet or
> plots or other data files and access them in the host OS.
>
> --
> Benjamin Jones
>
For this it would be best if shared folders are used, as Keshav
Oh well good news,
this clarification and redirection of "sage on windows" was
overdue ...
I agree with Volker Braun, that a Virtual Box based solution should
have priority.
A viable solution - especially since Virtual Box is GPLed now - is in
short term reach.
My last shot on it was the combined
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Volker Braun wrote:
> Instead of shutting down the virtual machine you can just save the machine
> state. Loading the vm then circumvents the whole boot process.
>
It looks like it works great on Mac OS X. The VM boots, and right away
the browser loads full screen
Instead of shutting down the virtual machine you can just save the machine
state. Loading the vm then circumvents the whole boot process.
--
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.c
This really looks like a great out-of-the-box solution. But it takes
around a minute and a half since i start the VM till i get the working
notebook. Can this startup time be improved?
On 10 ene, 22:42, Volker Braun wrote:
> Here is a new version of the virtual machine that now opens up a browser
Here is a new version of the virtual machine that now opens up a browser
inside the VM in addition to forwarding port 8000 with the host. So a
novice user can just fire it up and it boots right into the notebook. More
advanced users can use the host browser if they prefer.
http://boxen.math.was
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 7:17 AM, William Stein wrote:
>
> On Jan 10, 2012 12:50 AM, "Dima Pasechnik" wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tuesday, 10 January 2012 03:06:14 UTC+8, William wrote:
> >>
> >> > coLinux looks promising. What does stop one from putting Sage on it
> >> > presently?
> >> >
> >> > D
On Jan 10, 2012 12:50 AM, "Dima Pasechnik" wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, 10 January 2012 03:06:14 UTC+8, William wrote:
>>
>> > coLinux looks promising. What does stop one from putting Sage on it
>> > presently?
>> >
>> > Dima
>>
>> Nothing. I've done it before several times. I was hoping with my
>
On Tuesday, 10 January 2012 03:06:14 UTC+8, William wrote:
>
> > coLinux looks promising. What does stop one from putting Sage on it
> > presently?
> >
> > Dima
>
> Nothing. I've done it before several times. I was hoping with my
> email to encourage you (meaning anybody reading this!) to try i
On 1/9/12 11:42 PM, William Stein wrote:
+1 It's what I would use if I had to use Windows.
You do it even on a mac!
Jason
--
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 mor
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Volker Braun wrote:
> On Monday, January 9, 2012 11:13:27 PM UTC-5, William wrote:
>>
>> 2) One can use much more RAM with 64-bit. Many computers these days
>> have 8GB RAM (e.g., even my laptop).
>
> Or 16GB in my laptop ;-) Though its really only sensible to use
On Monday, January 9, 2012 11:13:27 PM UTC-5, William wrote:
>
> 2) One can use much more RAM with 64-bit. Many computers these days
> have 8GB RAM (e.g., even my laptop).
>
Or 16GB in my laptop ;-) Though its really only sensible to use ~50% for
the VM, which brings us back to the 4GB limit on
On Monday, January 9, 2012 11:14:56 PM UTC-5, William wrote:
>
> > You can configure port forwarding with VirtualBox. If you forward port
> > 8000 of the host system to port 8000 of the guest system, you get that
> > result.
>
> Thanks for the explanation; that's very cool. I assume this is what
>
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:19 PM, mmarco wrote:
>
>> By the way, how canhttp://localhost:8000ever work? If I'm using
>> VirtualBox and I go tohttp://localhost:8000in Internet Explorer, I'm
>> definitely *not* going to get something having anything to do with the
>> virtual machine.
>>
>
>
> You ca
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Volker Braun wrote:
> On Monday, January 9, 2012 4:07:49 PM UTC-5, William wrote:
>>
>> Let's focus our energy on doing this.
>
> Agreed!
>
>> Let's also plan to fully
>> support having both a 32 and 64-bit version. Right now I think we
>> only provide a 32-bit VM.
> Which reminds to check whether I still remember my Sage Wiki login and
> password ...
I'll just jump in to say that a little while ago we connected the Sage Wiki
logins to the trac user store, so you should log into the Sage Wiki using
your trac user/pass. Though your email was five hours ago
Le 09/01/2012 22:26, Julien Puydt a écrit :
The browser could be _in_ the VM ; that would make it easy to ensure
that both http://localhost:8000 and jsmath work.
... and no firewall & AV problems either ;-)
Snark on #sagemath
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.
Is there another port that is usually not firewalled that could be
used?
On 9 ene, 22:28, Volker Braun wrote:
> On Monday, January 9, 2012 4:19:36 PM UTC-5, mmarco wrote:
>
> > You can configure port forwarding with VirtualBox. If you forward port
> > 8000 of the host system to port 8000 of the g
On Monday, January 9, 2012 4:19:36 PM UTC-5, mmarco wrote:
>
> You can configure port forwarding with VirtualBox. If you forward port
> 8000 of the host system to port 8000 of the guest system, you get that
> result.
Thats what my virtual machine does, but let's face it: Networking is pretty
m
Le 09/01/2012 22:09, William Stein a écrit :
By the way, how can http://localhost:8000 ever work? If I'm using
VirtualBox and I go to http://localhost:8000 in Internet Explorer, I'm
definitely *not* going to get something having anything to do with the
virtual machine.
The browser could be _i
> By the way, how canhttp://localhost:8000ever work? If I'm using
> VirtualBox and I go tohttp://localhost:8000in Internet Explorer, I'm
> definitely *not* going to get something having anything to do with the
> virtual machine.
>
You can configure port forwarding with VirtualBox. If you forwa
On Monday, January 9, 2012 4:07:49 PM UTC-5, William wrote:
>
> Let's focus our energy on doing this.
>
Agreed!
Let's also plan to fully
> support having both a 32 and 64-bit version. Right now I think we
> only provide a 32-bit VM. If we are organized, we can do both 32 and
> 64-bit.
>
I don
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 12:25 PM, mmarco wrote:
> So, summarizing, a (let's say) VirtualBox VM, that boots directly into
> simple X environment with sage running on the background+firefox open
> pointing at it would be a good solution?
>
> That seems feasible. The bigest problem i see is the mouse
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Georg S. Weber
wrote:
>>
>> > but its less error prone imho.
>>
>> This is probably true. VirtualBox is massively more widely used.
>> When we used to distribute a coLinux version of Sage (in 2006), I
>> remember watching many Windows laptops crash hard due to the
>
> > but its less error prone imho.
>
> This is probably true. VirtualBox is massively more widely used.
> When we used to distribute a coLinux version of Sage (in 2006), I
> remember watching many Windows laptops crash hard due to their
> low-level driver. But that was 5 years ago, and things
Its true that I haven't spent much time with coLinux, I just read in the
FAQ that one can't run an X server natively. http://www.andlinux.org runs
Xming (a Windows X server) that coLinux connects to through the network. So
you need to configure your firewall to allow tcp port 6000. In fact, the
Then its even better that i thought. I always tried VirtualBox without
the extensions, so the mouse integration is a problem.
On 9 ene, 21:30, Volker Braun wrote:
> On Monday, January 9, 2012 3:25:54 PM UTC-5, mmarco wrote:
>
> > That seems feasible. The bigest problem i see is the mouse
> > inte
On Monday, January 9, 2012 3:25:54 PM UTC-5, mmarco wrote:
>
> That seems feasible. The bigest problem i see is the mouse
> integration.
>
Whats the problem with mouse integration? We just have to make sure that
the guest extensions are loaded in VirtualBox, then you can move the mouse
pointer
So, summarizing, a (let's say) VirtualBox VM, that boots directly into
simple X environment with sage running on the background+firefox open
pointing at it would be a good solution?
That seems feasible. The bigest problem i see is the mouse
integration.
What about a VM with no X that just boots,
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Volker Braun wrote:
> I had looked at coLinux before settling on VirtualBox. Since coLinux
> also needs a low-level driver I don't see any compelling advantage for
> our use. It is harder to install than VirtualBox and
I have the impression that you didn't seriou
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 10:41 AM, kcrisman wrote:
>> Yes, I think it's a good idea to stop spending time etc on Cygwin port.
>> It is a huge PITA to use it in its present state (having spent quite a bit
>> of time on it last year) ,
>
> True, though it's frustrating to have to count that all as a s
> coLinux looks promising. What does stop one from putting Sage on it
> presently?
>
> Dima
Nothing. I've done it before several times. I was hoping with my
email to encourage you (meaning anybody reading this!) to try it.
What stops me right now is that I don't have Windows installed
anywhere
I had looked at coLinux before settling on VirtualBox. Since coLinux
also needs a low-level driver I don't see any compelling advantage for
our use. It is harder to install than VirtualBox and you can't run X
on top of it right now. VirtualBox will be slightly slower in the
execution, but its less
On Jan 9, 1:18 pm, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> On Tuesday, 10 January 2012 01:11:37 UTC+8, William wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 7:32 AM, Volker Braun wrote:
> > > Hi Wiliam,
>
> > > Karl-Dieter told me that you found some problem with the virtual
> > > machine but he didn't recall any detail
On Tuesday, 10 January 2012 01:11:37 UTC+8, William wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 7:32 AM, Volker Braun wrote:
> > Hi Wiliam,
> >
> > Karl-Dieter told me that you found some problem with the virtual
> > machine but he didn't recall any details. What exactly is the issue?
>
> Volker,
>
> My p
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 7:32 AM, Volker Braun wrote:
> Hi Wiliam,
>
> Karl-Dieter told me that you found some problem with the virtual
> machine but he didn't recall any details. What exactly is the issue?
Volker,
My perspective changed a lot because I spent so much time during the
last week tryi
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 11:41 PM, Ondrej Certik wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Ondrej Certik wrote:
>> Interesting. Do you have some notes about your KVM setup? I want to
>> try it as well, as the ubuntu guys seem to prefer it over virtualbox:
I'm using kvm directly (not libvirt / vi
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Ondrej Certik wrote:
> Hi Gonzalo,
>
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Gonzalo Tornaria
> wrote:
>>
>> For comparision, I'm using kvm to virtualize our sage notebook server.
>> Here's the timings for your scripts:
>>
>> A) the real hardware
>>
>> 0.196608066559
Hi Gonzalo,
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Gonzalo Tornaria
wrote:
>
> For comparision, I'm using kvm to virtualize our sage notebook server.
> Here's the timings for your scripts:
>
> A) the real hardware
>
> 0.196608066559
> 1
>
> 0.191864967346
> -50
>
> B) the kvm instance
>
> 0.219820
For comparision, I'm using kvm to virtualize our sage notebook server.
Here's the timings for your scripts:
A) the real hardware
0.196608066559
1
0.191864967346
-50
B) the kvm instance
0.219820976257 (11.8% slowdown)
1
0.213951826096 (11.5% slowdown)
-50
Gonzalo
On Fri, Oct 23, 200
I assume the VirtualBox image is 32-bit and your native OS is 64-bit? So it
isn't that surprising that computations with bigger numbers are somewhat
slower (13x is a bit much still, me thinks)
Martin
--
name: Martin Albrecht
_pgp: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x8EF0DC99
_o
I just bought a new laptop, and I'm having driver troubles. I'll test it if
you make it.
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 2:55 PM, Jason Grout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> Does anyone have an already-built virtualbox image of sage?
>
> If not, is there interest? I'm building one right now.
>
> Thanks,
>
93 matches
Mail list logo
