[sage-devel] Re: lib*.so conflict

2017-08-31 Thread Dima Pasechnik
On Wednesday, August 30, 2017 at 6:14:06 PM UTC+1, Richard_L wrote: > > As I observed on the sage-release Sage.8.1.beta3 thread, a library > conflict causes 'make ptestlong' to fail under openSUSE LEAP 42.2. > Reworking the offending symlink in the sage installation to point to the > system li

[sage-devel] Re: lib*.so conflict

2017-08-31 Thread Richard_L
No. LD_LIBRARY_PATH is not set. The curious thing is that there are 29 lib*.so in the sage/local/lib folder that are in common with the system /lib64 folder, although not necessarily of the same version/sub-version. Only libreadline.so gives trouble during make ptestall. NB! Just grep'd all o

[sage-devel] Re: lib*.so conflict

2017-08-31 Thread Dima Pasechnik
On Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 4:03:48 PM UTC+1, Richard_L wrote: > > No. LD_LIBRARY_PATH is not set. > The curious thing is that there are 29 lib*.so in the sage/local/lib > folder that are in common with the system /lib64 folder, although not > necessarily of the same version/sub-version. Onl

[sage-devel] Re: lib*.so conflict

2017-08-31 Thread Richard_L
Both r-3.4.0.p0.log and rpy2-2.8.2.p0.log show sh: /home/rllozes/Development/sage/local/lib/libreadline.so.6: no version information available (required by sh) With or without restoring my hacked symlink to its original state, ldd local/lib/R/lib/libR.so and ldd local/lib/python2.7/s

[sage-devel] Re: lib*.so conflict

2017-08-31 Thread Dima Pasechnik
What does happen if you remove your system-wide (?) R installation, does it have any effect? I suspect it either interferes with running Sage (tests), or with building Sage's R and Rpy... On Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 9:37:26 PM UTC+1, Richard_L wrote: > > Both r-3.4.0.p0.log and rpy2-2.8.2

[sage-devel] Re: lib*.so conflict

2017-09-01 Thread Richard_L
Removing system-wide R has no effect on ptestlong. The same three failures occur. I'm out of ideas and out of time to work on this. For now, I will redirect the libreadline symlink to that belonging to the system, and get back to mathematical physics! Thanks for your efforts, - Richard On T

[sage-devel] Re: lib*.so conflict

2017-09-02 Thread Emmanuel Charpentier
I used to have the exact same problem (with libtinfo*) back when Sage shipped ncurses 5 (to which libtinfo* belong). My workaround was to move libtinfo* out of the way : Sage the used the systemwide libtinfo*. A recent upgrade to the Sage-shipped ncurses (which is now version 6) fixed this. IM

[sage-devel] Re: lib*.so conflict

2017-09-02 Thread Dima Pasechnik
On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 9:10:51 AM UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: > > I used to have the exact same problem (with libtinfo*) back when Sage > shipped ncurses 5 (to which libtinfo* belong). My workaround was to move > libtinfo* out of the way : Sage the used the systemwide libtinf

[sage-devel] Re: lib*.so conflict

2018-03-05 Thread Ralf Stephan
I'm interested in a fix because it prevents clean patchbot results on OpenSuSE > >- How to tell "configure" not to install the Sage-shipped version ? I >think I am able to look at the configuration of the Sage-shipped packages >for which this happens in order to understand what is

[sage-devel] Re: lib*.so conflict

2018-03-05 Thread Dima Pasechnik
On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 9:48:25 AM UTC, Ralf Stephan wrote: > > I'm interested in a fix because it prevents clean patchbot results on > OpenSuSE > Erik has an implementation of such feature generically, on some recent open ticket. > >>- How to tell "configure" not to install the Sag

Re: [sage-devel] Re: lib*.so conflict

2018-03-06 Thread Erik Bray
On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 12:02 PM, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > > On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 9:48:25 AM UTC, Ralf Stephan wrote: >> >> I'm interested in a fix because it prevents clean patchbot results on >> OpenSuSE > > > Erik has an implementation of such feature generically, on some recent open > t

Re: [sage-devel] Re: lib*.so conflict

2018-03-06 Thread Ralf Stephan
Very good. Doesn't it only work if the user not only has the library but also the respective headers, i.e., the corresponding xyz-devel package installed? On Tuesday, March 6, 2018 at 4:54:12 PM UTC+1, Erik Bray wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 12:02 PM, Dima Pasechnik > wrote: > > > > > >

Re: [sage-devel] Re: lib*.so conflict

2018-03-06 Thread Erik Bray
On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 5:20 PM, Ralf Stephan wrote: > Very good. Doesn't it only work if the user not only has the library but > also the respective headers, i.e., the corresponding xyz-devel package > installed? Depends on the package, but if one package is a build dependency of another package