On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 11:14 AM, William Stein <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 8:11 AM, Volker Braun <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 4:06:04 PM UTC+1, William wrote:
> >>
> >> > Also, your use case is a bit weird; Parallel installations on the same
> >> > server?
> >>
> >> It's David's use case for Sage Days 71.  It seems to me like a
> >> reasonable use case for development.
> >
> >
> > In fact, in that odd case why not compile once and then just create
> ordinary
> > copies? The copies will have dangling rpaths to the original, but as
> long as
> > you don't change the original you'll be fine.
>
> David, my understanding is that is exactly what you tried to do, then
> wondered why it didn't work:   "So I tried building a copy from source
> and then copying it five times. Unfortunately, the relocation script
> is run at the end of the installation, making it uncopyable.  This is
> despite the fact that I refrained from starting Sage after building
> it."
>

Yeah, that's exactly what I tried.  The original was still in place, but
Sage failed to start since it detected that it had been moved.

I understand that there were reasons for the recent change, and I'm not
arguing that we should return to rpaths.  I have two objectives in this
thread:

* to learn (and record for others) if there's something different I can do
during the build process to make a Sage installation copyable in the case
where I'm building from source and know in advance that I want to be able
to "cp -a SAGE_OLD_LOCATION SAGE_NEW_LOCATION."  William suggested adding
sys.exit(0) at the top of the relocation script (and remove it after
copying).  Any other ideas?
* to encourage people to make relocation better.  I've never been
interested in working on Sage's build system, so I'm not going to be
submitting a pull request on this issue.  I'm sorry if my original e-mail
came across as condemning the work others had done on the changes to rpaths
-- that wasn't my intention.  But I remember someone saying that it might
be possible to allow the relocation script to be run multiple times
(without having to rebuild all cython files and documentation).  That's
something I would like.

As a final question, I've been avoiding binary installations for years now
because, at some point, it was difficult to modify them.  I don't recall if
the issue was that you had to rebuild the whole Sage library, or some other
problem.  If I want to develop Sage, starting from a binary, are there any
issues I should be aware of?
David

William
>
>
> --
> William (http://wstein.org)
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "sage-devel" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to