#8306: Parallel inter/intra-spkg builds
-------------------------------------------+--------------------------------
Reporter: mpatel | Owner: GeorgSWeber
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-4.4.4
Component: build | Keywords:
Author: Mitesh Patel, John Palmieri | Upstream: N/A
Reviewer: David Kirkby, John Palmieri | Merged:
Work_issues: |
-------------------------------------------+--------------------------------
Changes (by newvalueoldvalue):
* status: needs_work => needs_review
* author: Mitesh Patel => Mitesh Patel, John Palmieri
Comment:
I've updated `deps` and `deps.diff`. Thanks very much to everyone for
their help with patches, typos, builds, testing, and other advice!
Additional data: I've had successful builds on bsd, sage.math, and t2.
The long tests pass, up to those to be fixed at #8731 and a
[http://groups.google.com/group/sage-
devel/browse_thread/thread/26b2aae934131c92/4faf6a32bd792962?q=solaris+bsd.py+group
:sage-devel#4faf6a32bd792962 pre-existing failure] in `BSD.py` on Solaris.
Builds with `SAGE_CHECK` set also succeed, except for R on t2, but this
appears to be a separate problem (see a later comment).
Should `$(BASE)` be an (in)direct prerequisite for all non-base packages,
including Fortran and Cephes? So far, I haven't had any problems with
these. Pending reports on sage-devel, we could open a separate ticket
about making the dependencies in `deps` more explicit/strict.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8306#comment:66>
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.
