#8731: update/upgrade maxima to latest upstream (5.21.1)
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
   Reporter:  jason        |       Owner:  tbd       
       Type:  enhancement  |      Status:  needs_work
   Priority:  major        |   Milestone:  sage-4.4.2
  Component:  packages     |    Keywords:            
     Author:               |    Upstream:  N/A       
   Reviewer:               |      Merged:            
Work_issues:               |  
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------

Comment(by kcrisman):

 With the new ECL and the new Maxima, I no longer get the error messages
 about installing a .fas or .fasb file.  That is good.

 Anyway, doctest should just be changed for the loading thing, regardless
 of where it does it.  All documentation requests do that, as does running
 maxima_console().  Unless... before, maxima_console() gave three loading
 statements, the last two of which are the ones which show up in your
 examples.  Now there are five, but the top two are new... are we stripping
 away three load statements in the output, but not more?  Just a wild idea.

 As for the last error, here it is in the maxima_console() - something's
 not going right.
 {{{
 Maxima 5.21.1 http://maxima.sourceforge.net
 using Lisp ECL 10.4.1
 Distributed under the GNU Public License. See the file COPYING.
 Dedicated to the memory of William Schelter.
 The function bug_report() provides bug reporting information.
 (%i1) sage0: x==x;

 stdin:1289935:incorrect syntax: = is not a prefix operator
 (%i1) (%o1)                                  x
 }}}
 Yet in the previous one we get
 {{{
 Maxima 5.20.1 http://maxima.sourceforge.net
 using Lisp ECL 10.2.1
 Distributed under the GNU Public License. See the file COPYING.
 Dedicated to the memory of William Schelter.
 The function bug_report() provides bug reporting information.
 (%i1) sage0: x==x;

 stdin:1373:Incorrect syntax: = is not a prefix operator
 (%i1) (%o1)                                  x
 }}}
 which sure looks the same to me, yet Sage catches it correctly before and
 not now!  What the heck?

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8731#comment:26>
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