[sage-release] Re: Trouble with gfan

Hi Dima On 2021-09-02, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > you can install g++7 package on Ubuntu 16.04. (google for instructions). > > This should do the trick (after distclean). I will not work with my old laptop much longer and I suppose that on the new laptop (with a more recent Ubuntu) the problem

[sage-release] Re: Trouble with gfan

Hi Jonathan, On 2021-09-02, 'Jonathan Kliem' via sage-release wrote: > Dear Simon, > > ./configure --help | grep gcc > > reveals that you should configure sage with > > --with-system-gcc=no > > I hope that works for you. Thank you. In fact I had the idea to do "./configure --help" and look out

[sage-release] Re: Trouble with gfan

Hi Matthias, On 2021-09-01, Matthias Köppe wrote: > OK, Simon, there is only one conclusion: Your machine is haunted and you > should abandon it. Witchcraft?? OMG!! Anyway, from your and Dima's previous suggestions it seems to me that the trouble might have been caused by a too old version of

[sage-release] Re: Trouble with gfan

Hi Matthias, On 2021-08-31, Matthias Köppe wrote: > This all looks fine. Can you check if anything changes if you remove some > items from PATH: > In particular /home/king/bin and /home/king/.local/bin and perhaps /snap/bin ./sage -f gfan fails in the same way as before. Best regards, Simon

[sage-release] Re: Trouble with gfan

Hi Matthias, On 2021-08-30, Matthias Köppe wrote: > 1) Could you check if you happen to have a g++ in > /home/king/Sage/git/sage/local/bin? (unlikely because you mentioned > earlier that the environment is correct in "sage -sh") No, /home/king/Sage/git/sage/local/bin/g++ does not exist, and

[sage-release] Re: Trouble with gfan

-g -c src/polynomialgcd.cpp -o > src/polynomialgcd.o > > It should say: > Building gfan-0.6.2.p1 > g++ -std=gnu++11 -O2 -g -march=native -DNOCDDPREFIX -DGMPRATIONAL > -Wuninitialized -fno-omit-frame-pointer -O2 -g -c > src/polynomialgcd.cpp -o src/polynomialgcd.o > &

[sage-release] Re: Trouble with gfan

ng@klap:sage$ echo $CXX g++ -std=gnu++11 This is what it should be, right? Best regards, Simon > > On Sunday, August 29, 2021 at 3:04:34 PM UTC-7 Simon King wrote: > >> Hi Matthias, >> >> the two logs are at https://users.fmi.uni-jena.de/~king/logs/ >> >> B

[sage-release] Re: Trouble with gfan

l config.log and the full gfan build log, we > can take a closer look. > > On Sunday, August 29, 2021 at 11:50:32 AM UTC-7 Simon King wrote: > >> Hi Matthias, >> >> On 2021-08-29, Matthias Köppe wrote: >> > On Sunday, August 29, 2021 at 5:44:33 AM UTC-7 Dima

[sage-release] Re: Trouble with gfan

Hi Dima, On 2021-08-29, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > The error you get is most likely due to an old g++, which chokes on a > newer C++ construction, > not due to a version mixup. > > What is the g++ version you are using? > (or perhaps you use clang?) > $ g++ --version g++ (Ubuntu

[sage-release] Re: Trouble with gfan

Hi Dima On 2021-08-29, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > I'd start by un-installing system-wide gfan (could it be that you have more > system-wide copies of it, e.g. in /usr/local/ ?) > and try building then. I tried to "find /usr/local/ -name *gfan*", which resulted in nothing. Then I tried "sudo apt

[sage-release] Re: Trouble with gfan

Hi Matthias, On 2021-08-29, Matthias Köppe wrote: > On Sunday, August 29, 2021 at 5:44:33 AM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote: > >> is gfan partially taken from the system? >> >> probably. Ubuntu 16.04 has gfan version 0.5, but Sage needs 0.6.2. >> A system-wide install of old gfan might get in the

[sage-release] Re: Trouble with gfan

Hi Dima, On 2021-08-29, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > On Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 1:32 PM Simon King wrote: >> In particular, the error message I'm getting looks to me like there is >> something >> wrong in the sources (namely: A different number of arguments in the header >>

[sage-release] Re: Trouble with gfan

Hi Matthia, On 2021-08-28, Matthias Köppe wrote: > We actually test this platform (ubuntu xenial), and gfan builds correctly. > See https://github.com/sagemath/sage/runs/3392764418?check_suite_focus=true > > This failure must be caused by something specific to your system - such as > some

[sage-release] Trouble with gfan

Hi! I'm afraid it's a long time since I last tried to build SageMath. When I now checked out the latest develop branch, gfran failed to build. >From the log: [gfan-0.6.2.p1] IntegerVectorList setTemp;for(auto c=observedExponents.begin();c!=observedExponents.end();c++)setTemp.push_back(*c);

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta9 released

Hi all, On 2020-03-31, Matthias Köppe wrote: >> > I don't know, but I found these instructions: >> > https://launchpad.net/~deadsnakes/+archive/ubuntu/ppa >> > that also mention what packages should be installed >> >> Excellent! After installing them and doing ./configure, I see this line:

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta9 released

Dear Matthias, On 2020-03-31, Matthias Köppe wrote: > On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 8:30:34 PM UTC-4, Simon King wrote: >> >> > Are you sure your /usr/bin/python comes from that distribution? As far >> as I >> > can see, xenial only has 3.5.1-3. >> >

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta9 released

On 2020-03-30, Matthias Köppe wrote: > Hi Simon, > > On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 6:45:17 PM UTC-4, Simon King wrote: >> Concerning too old: >> $ uname -a >> Linux klap 4.15.0-91-generic #92~16.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Fri Feb 28 14:57:22 >> UTC 2020 x86_64 x86_64 x86_

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta9 released

Hi Matthias, On 2020-03-30, Matthias Köppe wrote: > This is outdated. We now generate an up-to-date version of this manual > section at boostrapping time. Use "cat src/doc/en/installation/debian*.txt" > to print it. > > Or re-run configure and take a look at the system package installation >

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta9 released

Hi! On 2020-03-30, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > On Tue, 31 Mar 2020, 03:03 Vincent Delecroix, <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> Le 29/03/2020 à 21:50, Matthias Köppe a écrit : >> > >> > Let me remark that this is the first beta that tries to use the system >> > python3 in a venv (#27824)

Re: [sage-release] Sage 9.0.rc0 released

On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 8:41:16 PM UTC+1, Samuel Lelievre wrote: > > Le sam. 28 déc. 2019 à 02:12, Samuel Lelièvre: > > > > Computer, OS, build choices: > > > > - iMac, Mid 2015 > > - macOS 10.14.6 Mojave > > - build for Python 2 > > - build Sage's `gcc` and `openssl` packages

Re: [sage-release] Sage 9.0.rc0 released

Hi Samuel, did you open a ticket for the problem in sageinspect? Best regards, Simon On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 8:12:31 AM UTC+1, Samuel Lelievre wrote: > > Thu 2019-12-26 à 23:24 UTC, Volker Braun: > > > > 746a826377 (trac/develop, tag: 9.0.rc0) Updated SageMath version to > 9.0.rc0

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta7 released

Hi Dima, which one? meataxe or p_group_cohomology? How would either of them influence the gap packages? And is there a ticket for it? Best regards, Simon On 2019-11-27, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > IIRC this comes from Simon King's optional package. > > On Wed, 27 Nov 2019, 16:11 John Cremona,

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.9.beta8 released

Hi! On 2019-08-25, Volker Braun wrote: > I'm inclined to name the next version 9.0. In particular, we now have > Python 3 support that, while not perfect, is at least usable so we should > mark that with a new major version. Also point-9 is a natural place to > switch. If you want to voice

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.9.beta7 released

Hi! With 8.9.beta7 I get the following doctest failure with gap_packages: $ ./sage -t --warn-long 51.5 src/sage/tests/gap_packages.py Running doctests with ID 2019-08-21-21-10-47-72e22124. Git branch: develop Using

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.7 released

Hi Samuel, On 2019-04-17, Samuel Lelièvre wrote: > After running "./sage -i p_group_cohomology" again, a look > in $SAGE_ROOT/local/share/singular/LIB/ revealed that the > missing file dickson.lib had appeared there. Hooray! :) Best regards, Simon -- You received this message because you are

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.7 released

Hi John, On 2019-03-27, John H Palmieri wrote: > "make PKG-clean" should just look at the appropriate package manifest in > local/var/lib/sage/installed, for instance the file > "p_group_cohomology-3.1". That file contains a list of installed files, and > "make PKG-clean" removes those files.

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.7 released

Hi John, hi Samuel, On 2019-03-27, John H Palmieri wrote: >> Regarding the failures in src/sage/tests/modular_group_cohomology.py >> related to the optional package p_group_cohomology (details follow), >> can others confirm? I've not seen it. The folder in which certain gap and singular

[sage-release] Re: square root very strange in 8.5.beta3

Hi! On 2018-11-15, Erik Bray wrote: > Perhaps there should be a common suite of unit tests applicable to > symbolic functions / functions that can return symbolic expressions in > order to help ensure a consistent interface. This is all pretty > embarrassing :( Could that be a use case of our

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.4.beta7 released

Hi Travis, On 2018-10-03, tsc...@ucdavis.edu wrote: > In the file, I can get anywhere between 0 and 6 tests failing. Note that > once this works, it never seems to fail. Also, inserting output into the > error, n = 255 and self.order() = 9. I suspect the problem is in > Matrix_gfpn_dense as

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.rc1 released

On 2018-03-31, Volker Braun wrote: > As always, you can get the latest beta version from the "develop" git > branch. Alternatively, the self-contained source tarball is at > http://www.sagemath.org/download-latest.html > > fb9f38a4ae (tag: 8.2.rc1) Updated SageMath

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.rc1 released

On 2018-03-31, Volker Braun wrote: > As always, you can get the latest beta version from the "develop" git > branch. Alternatively, the self-contained source tarball is at > http://www.sagemath.org/download-latest.html > > fb9f38a4ae (tag: 8.2.rc1) Updated SageMath

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

Hi! On 2018-02-11, Ralf Stephan wrote: > Update with clang on Linux: sagelib ignores the --stdlib in CXX (#24705) > and fpylll apparently ignores the --stdlib in CXX and if you give it in the > CXXFLAGS it uses it only for C not C++ (#24707). So the former is a build >

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

Hi François, On 2018-02-11, François Bissey wrote: > It looks like you may have to provide the include path to __cxxabi_config.h. > I don’t know where ubuntu installs it. On Gentoo libcxx is configured at build > time with the right location with the “USE” variable I

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

Hi François, On 2018-02-10, François Bissey wrote: > * if you switch from clang+libstdc++ to clang+libc++ (or libcxx depending on > your distro) How can I find out which one I have to use? In all my failing attempts, I tried clang+libc++. > Ubuntu is probably the most

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

tioned in the documentation, as prerequisites. Since I have enough time, I am starting over from scratch (i.e., make distclean) Regards, Simon On 2018-02-10, Simon King <simon.k...@uni-jena.de> wrote: > Hi! > > After installation of clang-dev, I tried again, but alas, brial failed >

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

Hi! After installation of clang-dev, I tried again, but alas, brial failed to build again. Log is at http://users.minet.uni-jena.de/cohomology/logs/brial-1.0.1.p2.log So, I am giving up on it for now. Best regards, Simon -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

Dear John, On 2018-02-10, John Cremona wrote: > I installed clang on my ubuntu laptop. I use synaptic ( a front-end for > apt & co) for installing stuff as it's easier to search. Thanks a lot! When searching for clang-devel in synaptic, I was pointed to libclang-dev

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

On 2018-02-10, Simon King <simon.k...@uni-jena.de> wrote: > I'll try to search for "clang-devel ubuntu". No real success, except for some very complicated procedures given at https://askubuntu.com/questions/309786/llvm-and-clang-installation-on-ubuntu and lots of stuff th

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

Hi Ralf, On 2018-02-10, Ralf Stephan wrote: > You're missing a devel system package. I have it in clang-devel and > libc++-devel. I have libc++-devel (because it seems to be the only "libc++" available for ubuntu). But clang-devel isn't known to apt-get. I'll try to search

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

On 2018-02-10, Ralf Stephan wrote: > The linking error with --stdlib=libc++ persists. It appears ntl_ZZ.so is > built with both libstdc++ and libc++: At least while building, ntl did not complain, see http://users.minet.uni-jena.de/cohomology/logs/ntl-10.3.0.log However,

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

On 2018-02-10, Ralf Stephan wrote: > Also clang-5.0.0 cannot compile ppl. clang-3.8 and 4.0.1 are fine. > https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/24704 According to my log, ppl-1.2 was built fine. But I guess that's because I have clang version 3.8.0-2ubuntu4 (tags/RELEASE_380/final)

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

Hi Ralf, On 2018-02-10, Ralf Stephan wrote: > Simon do you have libc++ system-installed and given CXX='clang++ > --stdlib=libc++' ? How would I check whether I have libc++ installed? Resp. how would I install it? sudo apt-get install libc++ gives loads of errors. Best

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

Hi Ralf, On 2018-02-10, Ralf Stephan wrote: > Simon do you have libc++ system-installed and given CXX='clang++ > --stdlib=libc++' ? No, I followed the previous advice to give CC=clan CXX=clan++. Does that mean I should make distclean and start again from scratch? Best

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

On 2018-02-10, Simon King <simon.k...@uni-jena.de> wrote: > On 2018-02-10, Simon King <simon.k...@uni-jena.de> wrote: >> Hi François, >> >> On 2018-02-10, François Bissey <frp.bis...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I’d recommend to work on a separate clone. I

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

Hi Ralf, On 2018-02-10, Ralf Stephan wrote: > FWIW for me as Pynac dev clang has far superior diagnostics and refactoring > tools. From other programs I can confirm a speedup of compiled source of at > least 5%. Interesting. In threads from 2013, I also found that clang had

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

On 2018-02-10, Simon King <simon.k...@uni-jena.de> wrote: > Hi François, > > On 2018-02-10, François Bissey <frp.bis...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I’d recommend to work on a separate clone. It is what I have done >> on my Gentoo linux box. > > This is wha

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

Hi François, On 2018-02-10, François Bissey wrote: > I’d recommend to work on a separate clone. It is what I have done > on my Gentoo linux box. This is what I did now. It is still in the process of building. Will the SageMath installation recall that it was installed

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

Hi, I'd like to get some information. On 2018-02-09, François Bissey wrote: >> On 9/02/2018, at 23:03, Ralf Stephan wrote: >> >> So how to use clang on Linux? *Why* to use clang in the first place? I am not familiar with it, so I'd appreciate if you

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.1.rc0 released

Hi John, On 2017-11-17, John H Palmieri wrote: >> And WHY that change was made! >> > > If it takes a while to build the documentation, better to start as soon as > possible, rather than to wait until the last possible time, right? If the user's purpose is to use Sage,

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.1.rc0 released

On 2017-11-17, Thierry <sage-googlesu...@lma.metelu.net> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 02:37:37PM +0000, Simon King wrote: > >> Is it still possible to build SageMath without documentation ("make start")? > > make build Thanks! -- You received this

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.1.beta2 released

Hi Travis, On 2017-08-21, tsc...@ucdavis.edu wrote: > It is in a cython file, but it is not a cpdef method. However, I think > avoiding dict() (and using .iteritems() instead of items() because it is > Cython [so it is still Py3 compatible]) for non-sparse polynomials is

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.1.beta2 released

Hi Travis, On 2017-08-17, tsc...@ucdavis.edu wrote: > about half of the time is in > > {method 'map_coefficients' of > 'sage.rings.polynomial.polynomial_element.Polynomial' objects} > > and subfunction calls. I would say a better solution would include > improving

[sage-release] Re: Why is gcc built?

Hi Erik, On 2017-02-23, Erik Bray wrote: > IMHO building Sage should not just forge ahead with building its own > gcc without asking. I think it's bad enough that it's a package at > all, but as long as it is it should be strictly optional, and if the > version check

[sage-release] Re: Why is gcc built?

Hi Dima, On 2017-02-22, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > Looks like gcc spkg will not be built, just as you want. OK, then all is good. Best regards, Simon -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-release" group. To unsubscribe from this

[sage-release] Re: Why is gcc built?

After installing gfortran (not gfortan5 or gfortran5, which doesn't seem to exist), I still see various errors in config.log concerning fortran (see attachment) --- I don't know if Sage would still build its own gcc, but perhaps you can see from the new config.log what would happen. Cheers,

[sage-release] Re: Why is gcc built?

Hi John, On 2017-02-22, John Cremona wrote: > It would be helpful for anyone in Simon's position if, after > configure, there was a message saying something like "your build will > be faster if you install the following system-wide: gfortran, ... " > but I'm sure it will

[sage-release] Re: Why is gcc built?

PS: On 2017-02-22, Simon King <simon.k...@uni-jena.de> wrote: > Aha. Although I did "apt-get install gcc-fortran", gfortran is not there. And the reason is that apparently I didn't read the development manual with enough care. It advises to install gfortran (resp gcc

Re: [sage-release] Re: Why is gcc built?

Am Mittwoch, 22. Februar 2017 17:04:21 UTC+1 schrieb Jeroen Demeyer: > > On 2017-02-22 16:50, Simon King wrote: > > In other words, I still don't see why gcc should be rebuilt (unless the > > developer's manual needs update). > > Can you post the config.log file? &

[sage-release] Re: Sage 7.6.beta2 released

Hi! On 2017-02-04, Daniel Krenn wrote: >> Should 'make ptestlong' ignore the content of 'init.sage'? > > +1, I think (without having thought too much about it...) +1. IIRC, init.sage is about the user's personal configuration for interactive sessions, and s/he might want to use,

[sage-release] Re: sagedev error

Hi Volker, On 2015-07-17, Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote: This might be (accidentally) fixed by #18909, if not please open a ticket... Accidentally? The example in the ticket description looks exactly like the error I'm getting... So, it is not in sage-6.8.rc0? Because that's where I

[sage-release] sagedev error

Hi! With rerere enabled in git (after a suggestion of Volker), I get Failed example: alice.pull() Expected: Merging the remote branch u/bob/ticket/1 into the local branch ticket/1. Automatic merge failed, there are conflicting commits. BLANKLINE Auto-merging alices_file

[sage-release] Re: Sage 6.7.beta4 released

Hi Leif, On 2015-05-13, leif not.rea...@online.de wrote: ROFL, reviewing/merging #15642 that is. You can safely pull the branch there, then using a mirror. Or download the upstream tarballs manually from a mirror (they're in spkg/upstream/, not packages/upstream/). Really? wget

[sage-release] Re: Sage 6.7.beta4 released

Hi Leif, On 2015-05-13, leif not.rea...@online.de wrote: ROFL, reviewing/merging #15642 that is. In other words, the current develop is broken to the extent that one wouldn't even be able to download stuff without an unreviewed branch? Sweet. I am pulling from the latest develop in order to

[sage-release] Re: Sage 6.7.beta4 released

Hi! I get the following error when trying to build SageMath after pulling develop: ... patching file Cython/Includes/cpython/weakref.pxd patching file Cython/Includes/numpy/__init__.pxd Traceback (most recent call last): File stdin, line 35, in module File

[sage-release] Re: Sage 6.6.rc3 released

Hi Rob, On 2015-04-13, Rob Beezer goo...@beezer.cotse.net wrote: Passed immediately on solo try. Full log file should be public at: https://cloud.sagemath.com/projects/53b77207-8614-4086-a032-432af4b4cdbd/files/sage-dev-images/sage-6.6.rc3/logs/ptestlong.log I can't open it. sage -t

[sage-release] Re: Error building sagenb

Hi Volker, On 2015-04-07, Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote: See http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18131 ... which says pip requires ssl. Does that mean openssl is not enough any more? Best regards, Simon -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

[sage-release] Re: Error building sagenb

Hi François, On 2015-04-07, Francois Bissey francois.bis...@canterbury.ac.nz wrote: pip came into play here: http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17913 basically at least one component (webassets) keep being difficult with easy-install and the decision was made to use pip for sagenb. You are not

[sage-release] Re: Error building sagenb

Hi Volker, On 2015-04-07, Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote: Did you compile Sage after installing openssl-devel? Python must build the ssl module. Does import ssl work? No, import ssl in sage-python fails with ImportError: No module named _ssl (note the underscore). What I did

[sage-release] Re: Error building sagenb

Hi Jeroen, On 2015-04-07, Jeroen Demeyer jdeme...@cage.ugent.be wrote: Since pip depends on Python, the following should be enough: sage -f python make Yes, that did the job. Thank you very much! Simon -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

[sage-release] Re: Sage 6.6.rc1 released

Hi! git status gives me many unbeobachtete Dateien: src/sage/categories/category.c src/sage/categories/category_with_axiom.c src/sage/misc/inputhook.c src/sage/misc/readline_extra_commands.c src/sage/rings/padics/padic_base_coercion.c

[sage-release] Re: Sage 6.6.rc1 released

Hi Volker, On 2015-03-30, Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote: You can delete the extraneous files. OK. But how did they come there? I thought that meanwhile there is a separate folder for compiling Sage code. It seems you have the git rerere extension enabled Indeed I have. So, you can

[sage-release] Re: What to do to build 6.3.beta3?

Hi Leif, On 2014-06-07, leif not.rea...@online.de wrote: You can simply wget http://sagemath.org/packages/upstream/configure/configure-33.tar.gz and extract the tarball in $SAGE_ROOT (or just the two [to four] missing files in config/), then retry 'sage -i ecl'. I think I have already

[sage-release] Re: Sage 6.3.beta1 released

Hi Ralf, On 2014-05-13, Ralf Stephan gtrw...@gmail.com wrote: GIT_EXEC_PATH=/home/ralf/sage/local/libexec/git-core but git is in local/bin/? king@linux-etl7:~/Sage/git/sage which git /usr/bin/git sage-sh) king@linux-etl7:sage$ which git /home/king/Sage/git/sage/local/bin/git Anyway, this was

[sage-release] Re: Sage 6.3.beta1 released

Hi again, On 2014-05-13, Simon King simon.k...@uni-jena.de wrote: Anyway, this was with 6.3.beta0, and I now retry with beta1. Frankly I am disappointed about the current quality of doc-building. After pulling, make fails with Note: incremental documentation builds sometimes cause spurious

[sage-release] Re: Sage 6.3.beta1 released

Hi John, On 2014-05-13, John H Palmieri jhpalmier...@gmail.com wrote: In git's 'configure' script, it says: libexecdir='${exec_prefix}/libexec' and on the few platforms to which I have access, I see libexec, not lib. What platform are you using? openSuse 12.3 Do you have any

[sage-release] Page with closed tickets for sage-6.1 and sage-6.1.1 does not exist

Hi! As it seems, I can't post to sage-announce, where it was announced that sage-6.1 and sage-6.1.1 have been released. The announcement points to http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/release/sage-6.1/tickets.html for a list of closed tickets, but this URL does not seem to exist on the server.

[sage-release] Re: Sage 6.0 released

Hi Georg, On 2014-01-18, Georg Grafendorfer georg.grafendor...@gmail.com wrote: The search is not over yet, but so far this was found: ./hg/s/linux/rhel3_amd64/app/gap/3.4.4/bin/gap-static-linux-i686 which gap-static-linux-i686 does not yield anything, but one can do ggeorg@maschke% which

[sage-release] Re: Releasing Sage 6.0

Hi Volker, On 2013-12-18, Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote: This is the first official release for Sage 6, which from now on will use git and a single unified repository. Congratulation! * The master branch will stay at 6.0 until 6.1 is released * The develop branch will soon move