#8523: Optional package  p_group_cohomology-1.2 fails to install on Solaris 10
SPARC
---------------------------------+------------------------------------------
   Reporter:  drkirkby           |       Owner:  SimonKing   
       Type:  defect             |      Status:  needs_review
   Priority:  major              |   Milestone:  sage-4.4    
  Component:  optional packages  |    Keywords:              
     Author:                     |    Upstream:  N/A         
   Reviewer:                     |      Merged:              
Work_issues:                     |  
---------------------------------+------------------------------------------

Comment(by SimonKing):

 Replying to [comment:5 dimpase]:
 > calling spkg-install directly is certainly NOT the way it is meant to be
 installed.
 > It is meant to be installed either from within sage by calling
 install_package, or by calling
 > sage -i (or sage -f) at the shell prompt.

 I think we talk about totally different situations. You seem to talk about
 version 1.2, which is published and should certainly be installable by a
 user doing sage -i.

 But IMO, sage -i is the way to go '''only if the package is finished'''. I
 am talking about the yet-to-be-published version 2.0. I am still not
 finished with all details of the new algorithms and documentation, and it
 has not being packaged yet.

 I will certainly not do sage -i while developing new algorithms. Namely,
 before doing sage -i, one has to have a spkg. Thus, I would have to do
 sage -pkg after each tiny little change, 20-50 times a day! That's clumsy!

 Moreover, sage -i should be equivalent to unpacking the spkg (well, it is
 unpacked since I didn't pack my development version yet) and calling spkg-
 install (plus, perhaps, spkg-check) in the sage environment. So, if spkg-
 install works (which it does for me) then sage -i should work as well.

 So, testing whether sage -i still works will only be the last step before
 publishing version 2.0.

 > Please check that this works for you now, too.

 You seem to talk about version 1.2. This version ''did'' work, on quite a
 broad range of platforms. I never had the problem that you describe.

 In fact, I just tested (sage 4.3.4 on Opensuse; you said that the problem
 is not platform specific), and sage -f p_group_cohomology-1.2.spkg
 (without your changes) came easily beyond the point where the existence of
 database_gap is tested. Then, I interrupted with Ctrl-C.

 So, can you please tell me how I can reproduce the problem that you met?

 > you better just grab the spkg linked above, and tell Minh (and/or the
 release manager) to upgrade the sagemath.org repository
 > using this file. There this diff is already applied and the changes
 reflected in SPKG.txt

 I don't plan to re-publish version 1.2, unless I can reproduce the
 problem. But I will pull it into version 2.0.

 > and in the Mercurial:
 > the repository was off in your spkg, I had to do a hg add and a hg
 commit;

 WHAT?

 Sorry for shouting, but certainly the repository was not off. I don't know
 if you ever did sage -pkg, but it gives an unmistakable warning if the
 repository is not fine.

 That you had to do hg commit is clear. But certainly spkg-install was in
 the repository. So, why hg add?

 > I aslo created .hgignore to ignore src/db files (having huge files in hg
 isn't good, and you have an online database with these, anyway).

 Here I am not so sure, but I thought that I did not include src/db in the
 repository, for this reason. BTW, the online database does ''not'' contain
 the cohomology rings for the groups of order 64 -- these are only provided
 by the database in the package.

 > This way, I could give it a positive review (pretending you did it
 all:-)).

 Now I am totally confused.

 First of all, I think that this ticket is a "wontfix", because it will
 soon be superseded by another ticket that I will open when I publish
 version 2.0.

 Moreover, it is about a problem that I can not reproduce.

 Then you say you will give a positive review -- to changes that you did
 yourself?

 Best regards,

 Simon

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8523#comment:6>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica, 
and MATLAB

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-trac" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.

Reply via email to