On Apr 25, 10:21 pm, ugus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Sound pretty much like it could be. Can you take vanilla python 2.5.2
> > on your box, build from source and then check if the gdbm extension
> > compiles [I think it won't]. Can you then build gdbm from source and
> > use that version to
On Apr 26, 5:54 pm, ugus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> > I would suspect you need to do the following thing:
> > a) cd into $SAGE_ROOT
> > b) source local/bin/sage/env
> > c) patch the python.spkg, then run ./spkg-install from its base
> > directory
> > d) cd into $SAGE_ROOT again
Hi Michael,
> I would suspect you need to do the following thing:
> a) cd into $SAGE_ROOT
> b) source local/bin/sage/env
> c) patch the python.spkg, then run ./spkg-install from its base
> directory
> d) cd into $SAGE_ROOT again
> e) ./sage -ba
> f) start sage
> Have you done those things listed
Hi Michael,
> I would suspect you need to do the following thing:
> a) cd into $SAGE_ROOT
> b) source local/bin/sage/env
> c) patch the python.spkg, then run ./spkg-install from its base
> directory
> d) cd into $SAGE_ROOT again
> e) ./sage -ba
> f) start sage
> Have you done those things listed
Hi Michael,
> I would suspect you need to do the following thing:
> a) cd into $SAGE_ROOT
> b) source local/bin/sage/env
> c) patch the python.spkg, then run ./spkg-install from its base
> directory
> d) cd into $SAGE_ROOT again
> e) ./sage -ba
> f) start sage
> Have you done those things liste
Hi Michael,
> I would suspect you need to do the following thing:
>
> a) cd into $SAGE_ROOT
> b) source local/bin/sage/env
> c) patch the python.spkg, then run ./spkg-install from its base
> directory
> d) cd into $SAGE_ROOT again
> e) ./sage -ba
> f) start sage
>
> Have you done those things lis
On Apr 25, 10:21 pm, ugus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Sound pretty much like it could be. Can you take vanilla python 2.5.2
> > on your box, build from source and then check if the gdbm extension
> > compiles [I think it won't]. Can you then build gdbm from source and
> > use that version to
> Sound pretty much like it could be. Can you take vanilla python 2.5.2
> on your box, build from source and then check if the gdbm extension
> compiles [I think it won't]. Can you then build gdbm from source and
> use that version to build python? If that works it is likely to be a
> use flag pro
> Sound pretty much like it could be. Can you take vanilla python 2.5.2
> on your box, build from source and then check if the gdbm extension
> compiles [I think it won't]. Can you then build gdbm from source and
> use that version to build python? If that works it is likely to be a
> use flag pr
Hi,
> So is Arch a direct descendent of Gentoo, i.e does it us a descendent
> of its ebuild system?
nope, Arch build system is more lightweight, it's PKGBUILD is like
ebuild just in BASH not Python, it's also made for binrary
distribution in mind with possible easy rebuild by user, while on
Ge
On Apr 24, 6:48 pm, ugus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> - Hide quoted text -
>
Hi Osman,
> > Since I am relatively clueless about Arch can you poke around and tell me
> > what version of gdbm you have installed?
>
> gdbm-1.8.3-5 and this is the version used in Arch linux since
> 19.11.
Hi,
- Hide quoted text -
> Hi Osman,
> Now, since Fortran as a culprit is out I poked around and the
> following seems to be the likely cause of your trouble:
> gcc -pthread -fPIC -fno-strict-aliasing -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -
> Wstrict-prototypes -DHAVE_NDBM_H -I. -I/var/abs/local
> /sa
Hi,
> Hi Osman,
>
> Now, since Fortran as a culprit is out I poked around and the
> following seems to be the likely cause of your trouble:
>
> gcc -pthread -fPIC -fno-strict-aliasing -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -
> Wstrict-prototypes -DHAVE_NDBM_H -I. -I/var/abs/local
> /sage/src/sage-3.0/spkg
On Apr 24, 10:30 am, ugus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Michael,
Hi Osman,
> > I doubt compilation finished successfully in your case. You need to
> > set SAGE_FORTAN to the system fortran since the g95 we ship is broken
> > on Arch. We didn't automate that so far and we have been discussing o
Hi Michael,
> I doubt compilation finished successfully in your case. You need to
> set SAGE_FORTAN to the system fortran since the g95 we ship is broken
> on Arch. We didn't automate that so far and we have been discussing of
> solving that problem by defaulting to gfortran if it is available.
On Apr 23, 11:12 pm, "Andrzej Giniewicz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
Hi Andrzej,
> > > interesting, I built sage successfully and don't have those errors -
> > > using Arch and no SAGE_ANYTHING environment variables... I noticed I
> > > have other release data - was you trying 3.0 (later
Hi,
> > interesting, I built sage successfully and don't have those errors -
> > using Arch and no SAGE_ANYTHING environment variables... I noticed I
> > have other release data - was you trying 3.0 (later release - there
> > was second release, wasn't it?) - anyway - there's proof it works f
On Apr 23, 7:02 pm, "Andrzej Giniewicz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > > I have installed sage-3.0 from pre-compiled binary version in Arch
> > > Linux. It works without any problem.
> > > However, if I compile it from source code using gcc-4.3, I am getting
> > > the following erro
Hi,
> > I have installed sage-3.0 from pre-compiled binary version in Arch
> > Linux. It works without any problem.
> > However, if I compile it from source code using gcc-4.3, I am getting
> > the following errors when I run the sage after finishing the
> > compilation successfully:
>
> I
On Apr 23, 12:18 pm, ugus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
Hi Osman,
> I have installed sage-3.0 from pre-compiled binary version in Arch
> Linux. It works without any problem.
> However, if I compile it from source code using gcc-4.3, I am getting
> the following errors when I run the sage aft
20 matches
Mail list logo
