#11321: Make lcalc compatible with the new PARI
--------------------------------------------+-------------------------------
Reporter: jdemeyer | Owner: tbd
Type: defect | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-4.7.1
Component: packages | Keywords: lcalc spkg
Work_issues: | Upstream: Reported
upstream. Developers acknowledge bug.
Reviewer: Volker Braun, Leif Leonhardy | Author: Jeroen Demeyer
Merged: | Dependencies: #11130
--------------------------------------------+-------------------------------
Changes (by leif):
* reviewer: Volker Braun => Volker Braun, Leif Leonhardy
Comment:
`spkg-install:`
* The comment and a message regarding `SAGE_DEBUG` is not consistent.
(`SAGE_DEBUG` has to be set to `yes` to enable debugging support, while
anything else disables it, though not deleting any user-specified flags of
course.) I'd always add `-g` anyway, since this doesn't have any
measureable performance impact, only the object files will grow slightly.
* `$CC` must not be quoted in the compiler test (if we support flags
within `CC` rather than compiler paths containing spaces). Perhaps a
matter of taste, but this should be consistent in Sage, and e.g.
`distutils` uses the former variant, not to mention the way we use
`$MAKE`. Same applies to `$CXX` and in principle `$SAGE_FORTRAN`, while
the Fortran compiler test is useless there anyway.
* Funny that Dave uses `test -e` for the Fortran library...
* I wonder if error messages etc. should be redirected to `stderr` as we
started to do in a couple of scripts. The disadvantage of doing so is that
both streams occasionally get out of sync due to buffering, leading to
potentially confusing output.
* ''Copy sage specific modifications'' should now of course read ''Apply
Sage ...''.
* `$UNAME` should also be quoted (twice); `case ... in ...` would anyway
be better.
* I'm not sure if Cygwin needs ''both'' a `.dll` ''and'' a `.so` file
(cf. #11547). Currently the `.dll` is copied to an `.so` in
`$SAGE_LOCAL/lib/`. Unless it is statically linked, the stand-alone
`lcalc` might also require the shared library in `$SAGE_LOCAL/bin/`.
`SPKG.txt`:
* The ''Upstream contact'' section should be moved up.
* ''Special Build Instructions'' should read ''... Update/Build ...''.
* The ''Changelog'' heading is missing.
* The ''Dependencies'' section is completely missing.
Some files from `src/include/` can also be deleted (and I doubt we have to
copy ''all'' of them to `$SAGE_LOCAL/include/lcalc/`; `L*.h` and
`mpfr_mul_d.h` -- included by `Lgmpfrxx.h` -- should suffice):
{{{
#!sh
~/Sage/spkgs/lcalc-1.23.p7$ ls src/include/
cmdline.h Lfind_zeros.h
getopt.h Lgamma.h
Lcommandline_elliptic.h Lglobals.h
Lcommandline_globals.h Lgmpfrxx.h
Lcommandline.h Lgram.h
Lcommandline_misc.h L.h
Lcommandline_numbertheory.h Lint_complex.h
Lcommandline_twist.h Lmisc.h
Lcommandline_values_zeros.h Lnumberzeros.h
Lcommon.h Lnumeric.h
Lcommon_ld.h Lprint.h
Lcomplex.h Lriemannsiegel_blfi.h
Ldirichlet_series.h Lriemannsiegel.h
Ldokchitser.h Lvalue.h
Lexplicit_formula.h Lvalue.h.bak
Lexplicit_formula.h.swap.crap mpfr_mul_d.h
}}}
I wonder if it's worth to run Lcalc's tests from an `spkg-check` file.
----
I'd ''really'' appreciate having the changes to spkgs to be "finally"
reviewed committed, especially if files get deleted, as is the case here.
Also, IMHO commit messages are subject to review as well, no matter if
some merge script would add a generic one in case it is missing.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11321#comment:13>
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.
