[sage-support] Last couple reviews for 3.4.1.rc4
We are quite close to 3.4.1.rc4 and the remaining open tickets are at http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/query?status=assignedstatus=newstatus=reopenedorder=idcol=idcol=summarycol=ownercol=typecol=prioritycol=componentcol=reportermilestone=sage-3.4.1 The situation in detail is currently: No solution yet: * #5284: Set sage-flags.txt up to SSE2 only when building Sage in SSE2 only mode/remove SSSE3 and SSE4 flags (followup to #5219) * #5774: running make on a -bdisted binary is broken * #5806: Sage 3.4.1.rc3: failing test devel/sage/sage/misc/ sagedoc.py I can do #5284 and #5774 post 3.4.1.rc4 since it only affects -bdist. There are some suggestions for #5806, but unless someone puts up a patch soon I will likely make that file 'nodoctest' for 3.4.1 and deal with it later. Waiting for review: * #5662: Gonzalo Tonoria: Timing issue in clisp-readline (Nasty hang (deadlock?) in maxima pexpect interface on core 2 quad [Reviewed by Dan Drake] * #5810: Michael Abshoff: Sage 3.4.1.rc3: Fedora 10/64 - unable to start Maxima issue in shapes.pyx (should be fixed by clisp +maxima.spkg) * #5697: Michael Abshoff: downgrade GAP due to Itanium issues * #5823: Michael Abshoff, Gonzalo Tornaria: Update clisp to 2.47 and introduce noreadline mode dynammically for clisp and maxima The 8th open ticket is a maxima can't start up problem and fixed by #5823 it seems. #5662 has a positive review, but I am thinking if someone else took another look it wouldn't be too bad :) Cheers, Michael --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-support-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Problem Sage 3.4 windows XP
I'm having the same problem. Sage 3.1.4 works but after upgrading to 3.4 the notebook command appears to fail and goes back to the sage login menu. I'm using VMware Workstation 6.5.2, the OS is WinXP sp3, and the machine has 1.5 GB of memory. On Apr 15, 5:43 pm, madison.mich...@gmail.com wrote: I just tried increasing my virtual memory (swap) from 3.048 GB to 6.096 GB and than did not help. I also tried increasing my vmplayer memory from 512 MB to 788 MB and 1776 MB and this did not fix the problem. Again, I have a 1.4 GHz with 1 GB of ram on windows XP. I still have not been able to get Sage 3.4 to work. Mike On Apr 15, 2:43 am, Nasser Abbasi n...@12000.org wrote: On Mar 18, 1:33 pm, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 1:22 PM, madison.mich...@gmail.com wrote: I am also having a problem running Sage 3.4 on windows XP. Vmware starts up, but when I run the notebook command it flashes the IP Just out of curiosity, has *anybody* successfully used sage-vmware-3.4.zip? Maybe it is seriously broken? William I downloaded sage-vmware-3.4.zip on my XP SP2, and doubled click on the vmx and it starts up with no problem, and the I am using it now from firefox. 4 GB RAM, the VM player I am using is 2.5, build=118166 --Nasser --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-support-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Last couple reviews for 3.4.1.rc4
Ooops, wrong group - if you want to follow up please do so in sage- devel. Cheers, Michael --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-support-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: jsmath fonts bafflement
I do not think it is a jsMath bug. If I understand you, by works correctly you mean that Firefox doesn't show the font warning message (while IE7 does, which you consider not working correctly). You have tried several means of installing the jsMath image fonts as a solution to this problem. The jsMath font warning message actually has nothing to do with whether the image fonts are installed or not. It has to do with whether the user who is reading your page has the jsMath TTF fonts installed on their computer or not. If they don't, the message will appear and jsMath will fall back on the image fonts. (If you don't have the image fonts installed, then jsMath would report the infamous -7 error during startup). It turns out that jsMath used to use a different set of TTF fonts that where created by BaKoMa for use with TeX installations, but they ended up being problematic, so I made jsMath-specific TTF fonts to get around those problems. Under some circumstances, however, jsMath can still make use of the older BaKoMa fonts, and so if these are available, it will use them rather than the image fonts. That is probably what is happening for your Firefox, as the BaKoMa fonts are used by Firefox as part of its MathML implementation, so you probably have them for that, whereas your IE7 users don't have them installed. (I'm not sure what fonts the MathPlayer plugin for MathML in IE requires.) In any case, the way to eliminate the font warning message is to install the necessary fonts on the users machine (not install image fonts on the server, which you should do anyway). If you really want to remove the font warning message even when the user doesn't have the fonts, you can change the showFontWarnings setting to 0 in the jsMath/easy/load.js file that you are using. The font warning message is there so that your users can tell that they would have a better experience of your page if they installed the fonts. It is actually an indication of jsMath working CORRECTLY, not an error. When the message is issued, jsMath should continue to work, but will use the image fonts rather than native fonts, which produces somewhat poorer quality rendering, doesn't rescale if you change the font sizes, and doesn't print well. If you remove the warning, the users will never know that they could have better rendering and better printing. Davide On Apr 18, 7:48 pm, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote: Kevin Horton wrote: I have made some progress in that I discovered that Firefox 3 works correctly on my work PC. It is only IE 7 that has the problems. I can live with this, so I will not invest any more time on this issue, unless someone wants my assistance to try to beat this bug to death. This sounds like it might be a jsmath bug. Davide (the author) at least occasionally reads this list. He might ask for more details, or he might already know what is going on. I am curious, though: when you click on the jsmath icon in the lower right, a panel pops up and says what types of fonts jsmath is using. Is it using the image fonts? Thanks, Jason Jason --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-support-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: jsmath fonts bafflement
On 19 Apr 2009, at 06:54, dpvc wrote: I do not think it is a jsMath bug. If I understand you, by works correctly you mean that Firefox doesn't show the font warning message (while IE7 does, which you consider not working correctly). You have tried several means of installing the jsMath image fonts as a solution to this problem. By works correctly, I mean that Firefox displays the nicely rendered equations, while IE only displays raw latex code. The jsMath font warning message actually has nothing to do with whether the image fonts are installed or not. It has to do with whether the user who is reading your page has the jsMath TTF fonts installed on their computer or not. If they don't, the message will appear and jsMath will fall back on the image fonts. (If you don't have the image fonts installed, then jsMath would report the infamous -7 error during startup). For some reason, the fall back to image fonts is not working for me, using my sage server on OS X, and viewing the worksheet on a PC running IE7. I don't know if there is a problem with the image font installation in sage, a jsMath problem, or an IE problem. But, as long as Firefox will work, I am happy, and feel no need to spend more time on this issue. But, if you think there could be a jsMath bug that you want to investigate, I would be happy to help out. It turns out that jsMath used to use a different set of TTF fonts that where created by BaKoMa for use with TeX installations, but they ended up being problematic, so I made jsMath-specific TTF fonts to get around those problems. Under some circumstances, however, jsMath can still make use of the older BaKoMa fonts, and so if these are available, it will use them rather than the image fonts. That is probably what is happening for your Firefox, as the BaKoMa fonts are used by Firefox as part of its MathML implementation, so you probably have them for that, whereas your IE7 users don't have them installed. (I'm not sure what fonts the MathPlayer plugin for MathML in IE requires.) Thanks for the explanation. Kevin On Apr 18, 7:48 pm, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote: Kevin Horton wrote: I have made some progress in that I discovered that Firefox 3 works correctly on my work PC. It is only IE 7 that has the problems. I can live with this, so I will not invest any more time on this issue, unless someone wants my assistance to try to beat this bug to death. This sounds like it might be a jsmath bug. Davide (the author) at least occasionally reads this list. He might ask for more details, or he might already know what is going on. I am curious, though: when you click on the jsmath icon in the lower right, a panel pops up and says what types of fonts jsmath is using. Is it using the image fonts? Thanks, Jason Jason --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-support-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Problem with Hilbert class field of degree 1
Hi, I found some strange behaviour of the Hilbert class field of a quadratic number field when the class number is 1, so the Hilbert class field is equal to the ground field: sage: K.w = QuadraticField(-5); KX.X = K[]; H.h = K.hilbert_class_field() sage: (X + w + 1).base_extend(H) X + w + 1 No problem: the Hilbert class field is a proper extension, and the polynomial remains the same. sage: K.w = QuadraticField(-1); KX.X = K[]; H.h = K.hilbert_class_field() sage: (X + w + 1).base_extend(H) X + 1 In this case the Hilbert class field is equal to K, and the part of the polynomial that is not in QQ disappears. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-support-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Closest vector from a lattice
Let L be a lattice. Let a' be a vector outside L. How can we find the closest vector of L from a' using SAGE or Magma? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-support-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Problem with Hilbert class field of degree 1
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Utpal Sarkar doe...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I found some strange behaviour of the Hilbert class field of a quadratic number field when the class number is 1, so the Hilbert class field is equal to the ground field: sage: K.w = QuadraticField(-5); KX.X = K[]; H.h = K.hilbert_class_field() sage: (X + w + 1).base_extend(H) X + w + 1 No problem: the Hilbert class field is a proper extension, and the polynomial remains the same. sage: K.w = QuadraticField(-1); KX.X = K[]; H.h = K.hilbert_class_field() sage: (X + w + 1).base_extend(H) X + 1 In this case the Hilbert class field is equal to K, and the part of the polynomial that is not in QQ disappears. You've found a bug in the coercion in the special case of a relative extension of degree 1. Here's some simpler code to illustrate it: sage: K.w = QuadraticField(-1) sage: KX.X = K[] sage: H.h = K.extension(X-1) sage: H(w) 0 The internal function responsible for the bug is: sage: H._NumberField_relative__base_inclusion(w) 0 We are tracking this bug here: http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/5828 William --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-support-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
