On Wednesday, February 1, 2012 5:01:41 AM UTC+8, R. Andrew Ohana wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:04, John H Palmieri <jhpalm...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, January 17, 2012 1:59:45 PM UTC-8, William wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 1:39 PM, William Stein <wst...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> > On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 3:43 PM, William Stein <wst...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 9:26 AM, John H Palmieri <jhpa...@gmail.com> > >> >> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> On Monday, January 16, 2012 7:42:49 AM UTC-8, William wrote: > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Hi, > >> >>>> > >> >>>> A major blocker for Sage-5.0 is supporting OS X (version 10.7 -- > the > >> >>>> version that has been out for months now). > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Fortunately, it is now "relatively easy" to build sage-5.0.beta1 on > >> >>>> OS > >> >>>> X 10.7 with XCode 4.x, and have it start up. > >> >> > >> >> After building Sage on OS X 10.7, "make test" did this: > >> > > >> > For the record, running tests with "sage -t devel/sage/sage" yields > >> > hundred(s) of failing files: > >> > > >> > http://wstein.org/home/wstein/tmp/test-sage-5.0.beta1-osx10.7.txt > >> > > >> > It could be that most of these boil down to some code at the core of > >> > PARI (the bezout function) being miscompiled. > >> > > >> > There is a discussion about this from August 2011 here: > >> > > >> > http://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/archives/pari-dev-1108/msg00000.html > >> > > >> > It unfortunately appears based on the mailing list -- and searching > >> > through the ** 5 months ** since then -- that nothing at all was done > >> > to try to fix the problem, even though I had setup access to 10.7 for > >> > the Pari developers. Probably the main problem is that the machine I > >> > setup -- sqrt5.math.washington.edu -- is on the CS network, and for > >> > some reason it keeps getting kicked off. > >> > > >> > This really sucks. Maybe I can rewrite their bezout to get around > >> > the problem. > >> > >> Another option is to turn of optimization (-O0) when building part of > >> PARI under XCode 4.x, since the problem is bad compiler optimization. > >> I just tried, export SAGE_DEBUG="yes", then building PARI with > >> SAGE_CHECK="yes", and I get: "The PARI self-tests all passed". > >> > >> So something based on optimization flags is the workaround I'll pursue > >> for now. Something that is slightly slower than optimal is way > >> better than infinitely slower. > > > > > > I've been trying to build Sage with OS X Lion over the past few days, and > > things are going pretty well: there are a few doctest failures, but I > think > > most are numerical noise. Most spkgs build just fine, but because of > bugs > > in Apple's compiler, a few -- pari, gsl, symmetrica -- have problems > unless > > we modify them. So I propose the following modifications in the > > spkg-install scripts for those packages: > > > > - check to see if running Lion, and if so > > - check to see if /usr/bin/gcc-4.2 exists. this might be available > from an > > older installation of XCode, or it can be installed using the gcc package > > Georg posted a link to: http://r.research.att.com/tools/. If it's > there, > > set CC=gcc-4.2. > > - otherwise, turn off optimization (compile with -O0) for those > packages. > > This seems to avoid the bugs, although it will slow down those specific > > pieces of code. > > > > Opinions? > Do we know which files build incorrectly, we should only set the flag > for those (and not the whole library). Also, we should see if -O1 > works too. > > > > We also seem to need to delete the file > > SAGE_ROOT/local/lib/python/config/libpython2.7.a. Any reasons why doing > > this is a bad idea? (See > > <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11967>.) > > > > There are still a few remaining problems with OS X Lion, like self-tests > for > > cvxopt, but maybe someone can figure out how to fix them. > > > > See <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11881> for the trac > > metaticket about building Sage on Lion. > > > > -- > > John > > > > -- > > To post to this group, send an email to sage-...@googlegroups.com > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to > > sage-devel+...@googlegroups.com > > For more options, visit this group at > > http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel > > URL: http://www.sagemath.org > > I've started looking into the difficulties of getting sage to build > with clang (on lion), and have made some progress on the sage > libraries. > > Using CC=clang, CXX=clang++, and SAGE_CHECK=yes for all spkgs except >
I wonder if this is clang from Xcode 4 (i.e. what their cc is set to), or some other clang? Dima > eclib > givaro > libm4rie > gap > lcalc > linbox > matplotlib > polybori > pynac > libfplll > singular > ratpoints > sage > > where I used gcc instead (all Xcode 4). Most of the spkgs not listed > here that don't just build only needed some flags set (the exceptions > being python, which needed a patch, and ecm, which will probably need > a patch to the asm). > > I've built sage with roughly the same doctest failures as you get when > you turn off optimization for pari and symmetrica, although there are > likely some spkgs that aren't respecting CC and CXX. So far I've found > that flint, flintqs, ratpoints, f2c, and a small part of sage haven't > been, but thanfully all of them have been trivial fixes (except for > the last one, I haven't yet found where exactly it is calling gcc). > > (Beyond the issue of fortran) I'm not sure if it will be possible to > build all of the sage libraries with clang. For instance, it currently > doesn't yet support nested functions, which I know at least ratpoints > uses. > > Anyway, I just figured I'd share what I've found so far. > > -- > Andrew > > -- 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
