[sage-devel] Re: zn_poly status?

2018-09-13 Thread 'Bill Hart' via sage-devel 
Those are absolutely incredible numbers. I know just how technically insane 
zn_poly is, so to be beating that by a factor of more than two, especially 
in the FFT range is *absolutely phenomenal*!!

I now feel a little bit embarrassed at only having said, "NTL is probably 
your best bet".

On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 16:14:00 UTC+2, Victor Shoup wrote:
>
> I got curious, so I collected some data.  Here are timing results 
> comparing NTL's zz_pX multiplication
> to zn_poly's zn_array_mul.  For various values of n, I multiplied 
> polynomials of degree < n
> modulo a 50 bit number.  The values of n are powers of 2 and halfway 
> between powers of 2,
> ranging between 512 and 512K.
> Both NTL and zn_poly were compiled using their default configurations.
> Timings were done on a Skylake Xeon using gcc 8.2.0.
> Each row reports n and the ratio (time for zn_poly)/(time for NTL).
> So a ratio > 1 means NTL is faster.
>
> Also, by now, NTL implements a divide-and-conquer style truncated FFT, 
> using code some of which
> is ultimately derived from some other code originally written by David 
> Harvey (fft62).
>
> 512 0.706683
> 768 0.84687
> 1024 0.922457
> 1536 0.923881
> 2048 1.02458
> 3072 0.982044
> 4096 1.0894
> 6144 1.32346
> 8192 1.33724
> 12288 1.61943
> 16384 1.44681
> 24576 1.35887
> 32768 1.43008
> 49152 1.34462
> 65536 1.40433
> 98304 1.48556
> 131072 1.42532
> 196608 1.3503
> 262144 1.43245
> 393216 1.61353
>
> One can also compile NTL with an option that enables an AVX-based FFT 
> implementation.
> With that option set, the numbers look like this.
>
> 512 1.30262
> 768 1.45693
> 1024 1.60583
> 1536 1.46475
> 2048 1.58405
> 3072 1.6219
> 4096 1.78167
> 6144 2.1571
> 8192 2
> 12288 2.52612
> 16384 2.25737
> 24576 2.25134
> 32768 2.32498
> 49152 2.28747
> 65536 2.15306
> 98304 2.52464
> 131072 2.18056
> 196608 2.22606
> 262144 2.13347
> 393216 2.56471
>
> If anyone wants to the program I used for timing, let me know.
>
> On Friday, September 7, 2018 at 9:53:43 AM UTC-4, Erik Bray wrote:
>>
>> Hi all, 
>>
>> Does anyone know what that current status is of the upstream zn_poly 
>> package?  According to its website 
>> http://cims.nyu.edu/~harvey/zn_poly/ it is "no longer maintained", 
>> though it has been re-released under a BSD-compatible license. 
>>
>> Since its last upstream release the package for it in Sage has 
>> accumulated a number of patches as well, and I believe I may need to 
>> add one more patch to it for building properly on Cygwin :(  See 
>> https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/26050 
>>
>> If it's alright, I would propose creating a new repository for it 
>> under the sagemath gitlab organization (or GitHub) which would become 
>> the new "upstream" for zn_poly.  Then we can merge in all these 
>> patches; maybe even implement a new, more standard build system (I 
>> would be happy to do this).  In fact the current "build system" is 
>> going to have problems long-term, as it currently consists primarily 
>> of a Python script that will not work, as written, on Python 3. 
>>
>

-- 
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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: zn_poly status?

2018-09-11 Thread Victor Shoup 
I didn't run "make tune"...I guess I should to make things more fair.
So I downloaded the version of zn_poly  from 
https://gitlab.com/sagemath/zn_poly 

I then built and installed this version after running make tune and tune,
as per the instructions in the zn_poly README.
I then re-ran the comparison of non-AVX NTL vs zn_poly.
The results are almost identical:

512 0.70854
768 0.846024
1024 0.922126
1536 0.920149
2048 0.96085
3072 0.980663
4096 1.0842
6144 1.33045
8192 1.36914
12288 1.63375
16384 1.46481
24576 1.37829
32768 1.43536
49152 1.35335
65536 1.41785
98304 1.48913
131072 1.42141
196608 1.36
262144 1.42652
393216 1.61358

About the AVX-based implementation: it restricts the size of the moduli to 
<= 50 bits,
as opposed to 60 (or 62) in the normal implementation.  And because of CPU 
throttling,
it can even slow down some computations.



On Tuesday, September 11, 2018 at 10:31:16 AM UTC-4, Erik Bray wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 4:14 PM Victor Shoup  > wrote: 
> > 
> > I got curious, so I collected some data.  Here are timing results 
> comparing NTL's zz_pX multiplication 
> > to zn_poly's zn_array_mul.  For various values of n, I multiplied 
> polynomials of degree < n 
> > modulo a 50 bit number.  The values of n are powers of 2 and halfway 
> between powers of 2, 
> > ranging between 512 and 512K. 
> > Both NTL and zn_poly were compiled using their default configurations. 
>
> By "default configurations" did you run `make tune` for zn_poly? 
>
> > One can also compile NTL with an option that enables an AVX-based FFT 
> implementation. 
> > With that option set, the numbers look like this. 
>
> The AVX support alone would seem like a major boon. 
>
> > If anyone wants to the program I used for timing, let me know. 
>
> This is not my wheelhouse, so I'm not invested beyond the fact that 
> zn_poly is currently supported.  But thanks! 
>
> If others want to look into using NTL to replace zn_poly in Sage they 
> should work on that and see if the benefits hold up. 
>
>
> > On Friday, September 7, 2018 at 9:53:43 AM UTC-4, Erik Bray wrote: 
> >> 
> >> Hi all, 
> >> 
> >> Does anyone know what that current status is of the upstream zn_poly 
> >> package?  According to its website 
> >> http://cims.nyu.edu/~harvey/zn_poly/ it is "no longer maintained", 
> >> though it has been re-released under a BSD-compatible license. 
> >> 
> >> Since its last upstream release the package for it in Sage has 
> >> accumulated a number of patches as well, and I believe I may need to 
> >> add one more patch to it for building properly on Cygwin :(  See 
> >> https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/26050 
> >> 
> >> If it's alright, I would propose creating a new repository for it 
> >> under the sagemath gitlab organization (or GitHub) which would become 
> >> the new "upstream" for zn_poly.  Then we can merge in all these 
> >> patches; maybe even implement a new, more standard build system (I 
> >> would be happy to do this).  In fact the current "build system" is 
> >> going to have problems long-term, as it currently consists primarily 
> >> of a Python script that will not work, as written, on Python 3. 
> > 
> > -- 
> > 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 sage-devel+...@googlegroups.com . 
> > To post to this group, send email to sage-...@googlegroups.com 
> . 
> > 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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: zn_poly status?

2018-09-11 Thread Erik Bray 
On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 4:14 PM Victor Shoup  wrote:
>
> I got curious, so I collected some data.  Here are timing results comparing 
> NTL's zz_pX multiplication
> to zn_poly's zn_array_mul.  For various values of n, I multiplied polynomials 
> of degree < n
> modulo a 50 bit number.  The values of n are powers of 2 and halfway between 
> powers of 2,
> ranging between 512 and 512K.
> Both NTL and zn_poly were compiled using their default configurations.

By "default configurations" did you run `make tune` for zn_poly?

> One can also compile NTL with an option that enables an AVX-based FFT 
> implementation.
> With that option set, the numbers look like this.

The AVX support alone would seem like a major boon.

> If anyone wants to the program I used for timing, let me know.

This is not my wheelhouse, so I'm not invested beyond the fact that
zn_poly is currently supported.  But thanks!

If others want to look into using NTL to replace zn_poly in Sage they
should work on that and see if the benefits hold up.


> On Friday, September 7, 2018 at 9:53:43 AM UTC-4, Erik Bray wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Does anyone know what that current status is of the upstream zn_poly
>> package?  According to its website
>> http://cims.nyu.edu/~harvey/zn_poly/ it is "no longer maintained",
>> though it has been re-released under a BSD-compatible license.
>>
>> Since its last upstream release the package for it in Sage has
>> accumulated a number of patches as well, and I believe I may need to
>> add one more patch to it for building properly on Cygwin :(  See
>> https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/26050
>>
>> If it's alright, I would propose creating a new repository for it
>> under the sagemath gitlab organization (or GitHub) which would become
>> the new "upstream" for zn_poly.  Then we can merge in all these
>> patches; maybe even implement a new, more standard build system (I
>> would be happy to do this).  In fact the current "build system" is
>> going to have problems long-term, as it currently consists primarily
>> of a Python script that will not work, as written, on Python 3.
>
> --
> 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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
> 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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[sage-devel] Re: zn_poly status?

2018-09-11 Thread Victor Shoup 
I got curious, so I collected some data.  Here are timing results comparing 
NTL's zz_pX multiplication
to zn_poly's zn_array_mul.  For various values of n, I multiplied 
polynomials of degree < n
modulo a 50 bit number.  The values of n are powers of 2 and halfway 
between powers of 2,
ranging between 512 and 512K.
Both NTL and zn_poly were compiled using their default configurations.
Timings were done on a Skylake Xeon using gcc 8.2.0.
Each row reports n and the ratio (time for zn_poly)/(time for NTL).
So a ratio > 1 means NTL is faster.

Also, by now, NTL implements a divide-and-conquer style truncated FFT, 
using code some of which
is ultimately derived from some other code originally written by David 
Harvey (fft62).

512 0.706683
768 0.84687
1024 0.922457
1536 0.923881
2048 1.02458
3072 0.982044
4096 1.0894
6144 1.32346
8192 1.33724
12288 1.61943
16384 1.44681
24576 1.35887
32768 1.43008
49152 1.34462
65536 1.40433
98304 1.48556
131072 1.42532
196608 1.3503
262144 1.43245
393216 1.61353

One can also compile NTL with an option that enables an AVX-based FFT 
implementation.
With that option set, the numbers look like this.

512 1.30262
768 1.45693
1024 1.60583
1536 1.46475
2048 1.58405
3072 1.6219
4096 1.78167
6144 2.1571
8192 2
12288 2.52612
16384 2.25737
24576 2.25134
32768 2.32498
49152 2.28747
65536 2.15306
98304 2.52464
131072 2.18056
196608 2.22606
262144 2.13347
393216 2.56471

If anyone wants to the program I used for timing, let me know.

On Friday, September 7, 2018 at 9:53:43 AM UTC-4, Erik Bray wrote:
>
> Hi all, 
>
> Does anyone know what that current status is of the upstream zn_poly 
> package?  According to its website 
> http://cims.nyu.edu/~harvey/zn_poly/ it is "no longer maintained", 
> though it has been re-released under a BSD-compatible license. 
>
> Since its last upstream release the package for it in Sage has 
> accumulated a number of patches as well, and I believe I may need to 
> add one more patch to it for building properly on Cygwin :(  See 
> https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/26050 
>
> If it's alright, I would propose creating a new repository for it 
> under the sagemath gitlab organization (or GitHub) which would become 
> the new "upstream" for zn_poly.  Then we can merge in all these 
> patches; maybe even implement a new, more standard build system (I 
> would be happy to do this).  In fact the current "build system" is 
> going to have problems long-term, as it currently consists primarily 
> of a Python script that will not work, as written, on Python 3. 
>

-- 
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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: zn_poly status?

2018-09-10 Thread Jean-Pierre Flori 


On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 2:34:06 PM UTC+2, Erik Bray wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 1:43 PM 'Bill Hart' via sage-devel 
> > wrote: 
> > 
> > NTL is your best best. However zn_poly is a tour de force. It would be 
> hard to beat. 
>
IIRC it's very hardcoded into hypellfrob 
(http://web.maths.unsw.edu.au/~davidharvey/code/hypellfrob/) and very fast 
indeed.
As far as I know we have no alternative implementation to whats in 
hypellfrob though PARI/GP now offers more or less the same functionality 
with a different algorithm.

-- 
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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: zn_poly status?

2018-09-10 Thread Erik Bray 
On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 1:43 PM 'Bill Hart' via sage-devel
 wrote:
>
> NTL is your best best. However zn_poly is a tour de force. It would be hard 
> to beat.

If nothing else, I am making it easier to maintain now, so if someone
wants to hack on it it will be easier to do so now and has an
"official" home: https://gitlab.com/sagemath/zn_poly/

Though I'm not 100% sure about putting it at the top-level of the
sagemath/ org.  I might make a sub-org like "related-projects" or
something.  Any thoughts?


> On Friday, 7 September 2018 19:13:32 UTC+2, Antonio Rojas wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> El viernes, 7 de septiembre de 2018, 15:53:43 (UTC+2), Erik Bray escribió:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Does anyone know what that current status is of the upstream zn_poly
>>> package?  According to its website
>>> http://cims.nyu.edu/~harvey/zn_poly/ it is "no longer maintained",
>>> though it has been re-released under a BSD-compatible license.
>>>
>>
>> Given that the library has been unmaintained for years, has someone looked 
>> into whether its functionality can be provided by some other library 
>> nowadays?
>
> --
> 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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
> 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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[sage-devel] Re: zn_poly status?

2018-09-10 Thread 'Bill Hart' via sage-devel 
NTL is your best best. However zn_poly is a tour de force. It would be hard 
to beat.

On Friday, 7 September 2018 19:13:32 UTC+2, Antonio Rojas wrote:
>
>
>
> El viernes, 7 de septiembre de 2018, 15:53:43 (UTC+2), Erik Bray escribió:
>>
>> Hi all, 
>>
>> Does anyone know what that current status is of the upstream zn_poly 
>> package?  According to its website 
>> http://cims.nyu.edu/~harvey/zn_poly/ it is "no longer maintained", 
>> though it has been re-released under a BSD-compatible license. 
>>
>>
> Given that the library has been unmaintained for years, has someone looked 
> into whether its functionality can be provided by some other library 
> nowadays? 
>

-- 
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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[sage-devel] Re: zn_poly status?

2018-09-09 Thread Dima Pasechnik 
the correct url is
http://web.maths.unsw.edu.au/~davidharvey/code/zn_poly/index.html

-- 
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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[sage-devel] Re: zn_poly status?

2018-09-07 Thread Antonio Rojas 


El viernes, 7 de septiembre de 2018, 15:53:43 (UTC+2), Erik Bray escribió:
>
> Hi all, 
>
> Does anyone know what that current status is of the upstream zn_poly 
> package?  According to its website 
> http://cims.nyu.edu/~harvey/zn_poly/ it is "no longer maintained", 
> though it has been re-released under a BSD-compatible license. 
>
>
Given that the library has been unmaintained for years, has someone looked 
into whether its functionality can be provided by some other library 
nowadays? 

-- 
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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: zn_poly status?

2018-09-07 Thread Erik Bray 
On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 6:27 PM Timo Kaufmann  wrote:
>
>
>
> Am Freitag, 7. September 2018 17:56:04 UTC+2 schrieb Erik Bray:
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 5:29 PM Timo Kaufmann  wrote:
>> >
>> > For what its worth, we currently don't apply any patches in nix and at 
>> > least the sage doctests pass. A more standard build would still be nice 
>> > though.  And since upstream is officially dead, I think giving it a new 
>> > home would be very good. +1 from me.
>>
>> Most of the patches are build-related and test-related fixes, many of
>> which seem to stem from issues on OSX.
>
>
> We build it on OSX too. We only run `make check` though, not `make test`. I 
> can't verify if that would pass on darwin since I don't own a mac.

Well, a lot of these patches are pretty old too.  Who knows if they're
still really relevant.  Most of them seem harmless enough so I've gone
ahead and applied them.  I also applied the patches I need to build
correctly on Cygwin.

A bit later I will work on autotoolizing it, but in the short term I
might go ahead and make a release based on the patches applied above,
as I really need it for the Cygwin fixes which are a release blocker.


>>
>>
>>
>> > Am Freitag, 7. September 2018 15:53:43 UTC+2 schrieb Erik Bray:
>> >>
>> >> Hi all,
>> >>
>> >> Does anyone know what that current status is of the upstream zn_poly
>> >> package?  According to its website
>> >> http://cims.nyu.edu/~harvey/zn_poly/ it is "no longer maintained",
>> >> though it has been re-released under a BSD-compatible license.
>> >>
>> >> Since its last upstream release the package for it in Sage has
>> >> accumulated a number of patches as well, and I believe I may need to
>> >> add one more patch to it for building properly on Cygwin :(  See
>> >> https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/26050
>> >>
>> >> If it's alright, I would propose creating a new repository for it
>> >> under the sagemath gitlab organization (or GitHub) which would become
>> >> the new "upstream" for zn_poly.  Then we can merge in all these
>> >> patches; maybe even implement a new, more standard build system (I
>> >> would be happy to do this).  In fact the current "build system" is
>> >> going to have problems long-term, as it currently consists primarily
>> >> of a Python script that will not work, as written, on Python 3.
>> >
>> > --
>> > 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 sage-devel+...@googlegroups.com.
>> > To post to this group, send email to sage-...@googlegroups.com.
>> > 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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
> 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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: zn_poly status?

2018-09-07 Thread Timo Kaufmann 


Am Freitag, 7. September 2018 17:56:04 UTC+2 schrieb Erik Bray:
>
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 5:29 PM Timo Kaufmann  > wrote: 
> > 
> > For what its worth, we currently don't apply any patches in nix and at 
> least the sage doctests pass. A more standard build would still be nice 
> though.  And since upstream is officially dead, I think giving it a new 
> home would be very good. +1 from me. 
>
> Most of the patches are build-related and test-related fixes, many of 
> which seem to stem from issues on OSX. 
>

We build it on OSX too. We only run `make check` though, not `make test`. I 
can't verify if that would pass on darwin since I don't own a mac. 

>
>
> > Am Freitag, 7. September 2018 15:53:43 UTC+2 schrieb Erik Bray: 
> >> 
> >> Hi all, 
> >> 
> >> Does anyone know what that current status is of the upstream zn_poly 
> >> package?  According to its website 
> >> http://cims.nyu.edu/~harvey/zn_poly/ it is "no longer maintained", 
> >> though it has been re-released under a BSD-compatible license. 
> >> 
> >> Since its last upstream release the package for it in Sage has 
> >> accumulated a number of patches as well, and I believe I may need to 
> >> add one more patch to it for building properly on Cygwin :(  See 
> >> https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/26050 
> >> 
> >> If it's alright, I would propose creating a new repository for it 
> >> under the sagemath gitlab organization (or GitHub) which would become 
> >> the new "upstream" for zn_poly.  Then we can merge in all these 
> >> patches; maybe even implement a new, more standard build system (I 
> >> would be happy to do this).  In fact the current "build system" is 
> >> going to have problems long-term, as it currently consists primarily 
> >> of a Python script that will not work, as written, on Python 3. 
> > 
> > -- 
> > 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 sage-devel+...@googlegroups.com . 
> > To post to this group, send email to sage-...@googlegroups.com 
> . 
> > 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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: zn_poly status?

2018-09-07 Thread Erik Bray 
On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 5:29 PM Timo Kaufmann  wrote:
>
> For what its worth, we currently don't apply any patches in nix and at least 
> the sage doctests pass. A more standard build would still be nice though.  
> And since upstream is officially dead, I think giving it a new home would be 
> very good. +1 from me.

Most of the patches are build-related and test-related fixes, many of
which seem to stem from issues on OSX.


> Am Freitag, 7. September 2018 15:53:43 UTC+2 schrieb Erik Bray:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Does anyone know what that current status is of the upstream zn_poly
>> package?  According to its website
>> http://cims.nyu.edu/~harvey/zn_poly/ it is "no longer maintained",
>> though it has been re-released under a BSD-compatible license.
>>
>> Since its last upstream release the package for it in Sage has
>> accumulated a number of patches as well, and I believe I may need to
>> add one more patch to it for building properly on Cygwin :(  See
>> https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/26050
>>
>> If it's alright, I would propose creating a new repository for it
>> under the sagemath gitlab organization (or GitHub) which would become
>> the new "upstream" for zn_poly.  Then we can merge in all these
>> patches; maybe even implement a new, more standard build system (I
>> would be happy to do this).  In fact the current "build system" is
>> going to have problems long-term, as it currently consists primarily
>> of a Python script that will not work, as written, on Python 3.
>
> --
> 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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
> 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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[sage-devel] Re: zn_poly status?

2018-09-07 Thread Timo Kaufmann 
For what its worth, we currently don't apply any patches in nix and at 
least the sage doctests pass. A more standard build would still be nice 
though.  And since upstream is officially dead, I think giving it a new 
home would be very good. +1 from me.

Am Freitag, 7. September 2018 15:53:43 UTC+2 schrieb Erik Bray:
>
> Hi all, 
>
> Does anyone know what that current status is of the upstream zn_poly 
> package?  According to its website 
> http://cims.nyu.edu/~harvey/zn_poly/ it is "no longer maintained", 
> though it has been re-released under a BSD-compatible license. 
>
> Since its last upstream release the package for it in Sage has 
> accumulated a number of patches as well, and I believe I may need to 
> add one more patch to it for building properly on Cygwin :(  See 
> https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/26050 
>
> If it's alright, I would propose creating a new repository for it 
> under the sagemath gitlab organization (or GitHub) which would become 
> the new "upstream" for zn_poly.  Then we can merge in all these 
> patches; maybe even implement a new, more standard build system (I 
> would be happy to do this).  In fact the current "build system" is 
> going to have problems long-term, as it currently consists primarily 
> of a Python script that will not work, as written, on Python 3. 
>

-- 
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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.