On Thursday, November 15, 2012 2:56:44 PM UTC-5, Thierry (sage-googlesucks@xxx) wrote: > Also, SAGE_FAT_BINARY essentially means "pick reasonable defaults on > non-museum hardware for the sage binary tarball". The only bug is that the > variable has a strange name for historical reasons.
As of today, this seems not to be fixed in the spkg proposed in #10508 : SAGE_FAT_BINARY default still overwrites SAGE_ATLAS_ARCH when it is set. The combination is nonsensical: You either want a binary that runs on all reasonably old hardware for distribution, or you want to specify the architecture in detail. Which one is it? I don't mind adding support for nonsensical combinations if there is demand. But the only bug here is that it requires SSE2 on i386, which is probably too much. Note that the old ATLAS (which we currently ship, and probably will for a while) doesn't have "generic" archdefs to start with so it always was a crapshot. Also, in the #10508 package, configure_base() method adds 3DNow set of instructions to some Intel architecture, which seems not to know it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3DNow! So? Sage will never run with only the original 8086 instruction set. For many of the processors on your web page you'll have to recompile a linux distro from source, never mind Sage. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel?hl=en.
