I was hoping to find out where the "abort trap" problems with 10.6 OSX originated. I was going to try and peek at the memory of the 32 bit 10.5( maybe 10.4) binary (which passes the doctests) and compare it to the 10.6 binary (which doesn't).
I did later find the sage -gdb command which helps in finding the backtrace after the abort trap, but this information isn't telling me anything that I think will be productive (it is the same backtrace that you had posted on sage trac ) and I unfortunately do not see how to simultaneously operate the debugger while inside of the interactive program. For the most part I have determined that I am in over my head when it comes to this particularly vexing problem and have gone back to just doing my own work with the 32 bit version. Sorry for any time wasted by my question or any false hope stirred by my "tackling" this issue. I just had a moment of naive hubris that led me to believe that I would see something that you all had not. :) Especially considering that this seems to be, in my experience of using sage, one of the longest standing unresolved bugs. (generally almost any trouble that I have had has been dealt with within one or two releases) Thanks for your hard work, sage is a very powerful tool. -- D. M. Monarres dmmonar...@gmail.com Originality is a thing we constantly clamor for, and constantly quarrel with. –Thomas Carlyle (1795-1881) Scottish essayist, historian On Nov 22, 2009, at 9:08 PM, William Stein wrote: > On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 12:27 PM, David M. Monarres > <dmmonar...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Pardon the newbie question, >> >> Is there a quick way to get backtraces for doctest failures? > > I find this useful: > > sage -t --verbose filename.py > >> I have been running gdb python in a sage subshell, then copying the >> offending lines into a text file and then running from within gdb. This >> seems to be awkward and I was looking for a better way. >> > > What precisely are you debugging/dealing with? > >> >> This is my first foray into serious debugging so I do not have a good >> workflow. >> >> -- >> David Monarres >> dmmonar...@gmail.com >> >> "There... I've run rings 'round you logically" >> -- Monty Python's Flying Circus >> >> On Nov 13, 2009, at 3:44 PM, William Stein wrote: >> >>> >>> On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 3:42 PM, David M. Monarres <dmmonar...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Thanks for the information, that is why I had asked. I have never really >>>> dug this deep into sage before, (nor software building in general) so I >>>> am completely green. >>>> >>>> Saw this posting on macports + the output of otool -L made me think that >>>> this could be the problem. But I agree that it isn't likely. >>>> >>> >>> Probably not. That said, in debugging (and problem solving in >>> general), it's generally a good idea to be very skeptical of anything >>> a person who has failed to solve a problem (in this case, me) tells >>> you. >>> >>> William >>> >>>> >> >> >> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ >> 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.google.com/group/sage-devel >> URL: http://www.sagemath.org >> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- >> >> > > > > -- > William Stein > Associate Professor of Mathematics > University of Washington > http://wstein.org > > -- > 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.google.com/group/sage-devel > URL: http://www.sagemath.org -- 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.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
