Re: [sage-devel] Re: Poll: make giacpy_sage a standard package

First, thank you for this discussion. About the sage pip install project. The problem is that I don't know at all what will be available. But if you are done with sage's pyx files in src/sage/libs then it should be similar with giacpy_sage. It is indeed rare for an spkg to be linked to the

Re: [sage-devel] sage 8.9beta4 ntl

Thank you! Le vendredi 2 août 2019 21:55:14 UTC+2, Dima Pasechnik a écrit : > > On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 10:42 PM Dima Pasechnik > wrote: > > > > On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 10:10 PM Han Frederic > wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > I have someth

[sage-devel] sage 8.9beta4 ntl

Hello, I have something strange (fedora 29, amd64) I have cloned sage 8.9beta4 and make it. All seems functionnal but I realised that ntl is not built. This looks strange because giac is built and ntl is listed in the file: build/pkgs/giac/dependencies Moreover I have ntl and other giac deps

Re: [sage-devel] Giac fails to build

Le vendredi 20 octobre 2017 05:38:57 UTC+2, Timo Kaufmann a écrit : > > After adding one more depencency (hevea) the compilation succeeds. Thank > you for your help. > > It needs quite some dependencies that are not mentioned on the README's > instructions though (like hevea and texlive). Are

Re: [sage-devel] Re: make giac/giacpy a standard package

Le samedi 3 décembre 2016 13:55:30 UTC+1, Jeroen Demeyer a écrit : > > On 2016-07-03 21:08, Han Frederic wrote: > > Yes these binaries were left in upstream 1.2.2-37 source tarball, but it > > is a mistake. > > How do you create those binaries? It should be done by

Re: [sage-devel] Re: make giac/giacpy a standard package

Hi ralf, I am also lost because what you ask in this trac is what is done by the build/pkg/giac/spkg-src {{{ VERSION="1.2.2" VERSIONREV="103" # The upstream tarball name is: giac"$SOURCEORIG".tar.gz SOURCEORIG=_"$VERSION"-"$VERSIONREV" ... # Downloading upstream source sage-download-file

Re: [sage-devel] Re: make giac/giacpy a standard package

Le vendredi 2 décembre 2016 11:06:34 UTC+1, Ralf Stephan a écrit : > > On Friday, December 2, 2016 at 10:51:47 AM UTC+1, Han Frederic wrote: >> >> We had this argument already. If you prefer to keep it this way, please >>>> provide us a VCS (git preferred) re

Re: [sage-devel] Re: make giac/giacpy a standard package

Le vendredi 2 décembre 2016 08:37:20 UTC+1, Ralf Stephan a écrit : > > On Tuesday, July 5, 2016 at 9:31:04 AM UTC+2, Dima Pasechnik wrote: >> >> Yes that tarball has the goods. I’ll wait for a new 1.2.2-xx tarball >>> though. No self respecting >>> packager wants to deal with an upstream

[sage-devel] Re: singular update and interreduced_basis

Le jeudi 17 novembre 2016 22:40:12 UTC+1, Dima Pasechnik a écrit : > > > git show 5b8343be > > Thank you for the link. For the moment I have summarized the problem in #21884, let's see jeroen thinks if it worth a new trac. best regards Frederic > Hopefully Jeroen (in cc) can explain this

[sage-devel] Re: singular update and interreduced_basis

But it looks that the normalisation was in sage singular interface: The interred_libsingular function of multi_polynomial_ideal_libsingular.pyx ends in sage 7.4beta5 like this: # divide head by coefficients if r.ringtype == 0: for j from 0 <= j < IDELEMS(result): p =

[sage-devel] singular update and interreduced_basis

With singular 4 on sage I have now: sage: P. = PolynomialRing(QQ,3, order='lex') sage: toto=ideal([7*a - 420*c^3 + 158*c^2 + 8*c - 7, 7*b + 210*c^3 - 79*c^2 + 3*c, 84*c^4 - 40*c^3 + c^2 + c]) sage: toto.interreduced_basis? sage: g=toto.interreduced_basis() sage: g[0].lc() 7 sage:

[sage-devel] Re: make giac/giacpy a standard package

I am opening https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/20946 to update the giac spkg -- 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

Re: [sage-devel] make giac/giacpy a standard package

Le mardi 5 juillet 2016 10:43:52 UTC+2, François a écrit : > > > Han, I have looked at both giacpy and giacpy-sage now. They hardly > have anything in common anymore. > At least, it is not obvious from the repos. > > Given that the split is already that wide, would there be an objection > to

Re: [sage-devel] Re: make giac/giacpy a standard package

Le lundi 4 juillet 2016 04:14:26 UTC+2, François a écrit : > > So I have been inspecting giac, as any discussion of making something > a standard package as an impact for sage-on-gentoo. > We have an old version in the science overlay so I am working on > upgrading it. > > 1) current

[sage-devel] Re: make giac/giacpy a standard package

Le samedi 2 juillet 2016 13:30:35 UTC+2, leif a écrit : > > leif wrote: > > Ralf Stephan wrote: > >> On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 10:00:34 AM UTC+2, Ralf Stephan wrote: > >> > >> The giac and giacpy packages are now one year optional (#12375). > Since > >> pynac-0.6.6 (#20742) has

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Build system changes in 6.8.beta7

Thank you! Le mercredi 8 juillet 2015 12:41:03 UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer a écrit : On 2015-07-08 12:37, Han Frederic wrote: with the make method, is there something analogous to ./sage -i -c pkgname ? env SAGE_CHECK=yes make pkgname (in bash, you can drop the env) -- You received

[sage-devel] Re: Build system changes in 6.8.beta7

Le vendredi 3 juillet 2015 09:41:02 UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer a écrit : Hello all, There were some important changes to the Sage build system in 6.8.beta7: * All logs of running make will appear in install.log, including the logs of the documentation and the Sage library build. Nothing

Re: [sage-devel] Re: giac/giacpy packages

I can help also for the giacpy syntax. We need 2 cases: only for grevlex, prime fields of char p 2^31 or QQ (I think that in other cases giac could be very bad) may be the easiest for me is if you could start a branch with those 2 cases and some tags where I should insert the conversions and

Re: [sage-devel] Re: giac/giacpy packages

I think I can start something it looks to be in src/sage/rings/polynomial/multi_polynomial_ideal.py http://git.sagemath.org/sage.git/tree/src/sage/rings/polynomial/multi_polynomial_ideal.py?id=c0e721783317f205106c9c3c552e366ce4e6c50e It may not be necessary to modify the cython interface for

[sage-devel] giac/giacpy packages

I'd like to point out that recently http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/12375 was closed. I'd like also to thank here all the participants. Since sage 6.8.beta5, giac and its cython interface giacpy are avaible as optional packages. It provides interesting features in symbolic computations (gcd,

[sage-devel] Re: Slowness in comparing symbolic expressions

Le jeudi 27 novembre 2014 02:46:26 UTC+1, Robert Dodier a écrit : On 2014-11-26, Han Frederic h...@math.jussieu.fr javascript: wrote: Hi, I have tried the factorization with giacpy. (cf trac 12375). I had to expexpand first before factoring and did this: sage: from giacpy import

[sage-devel] Re: Slowness in comparing symbolic expressions

Incidentally I observe that Sympy has the same behavior, so we can't just nick their factoring algorithm -- maybe some other package we can try the same example to see if any of them handle it quickly? best Robert Dodier Hi, I have tried the factorization with giacpy. (cf trac

[sage-devel] space in trac login and ssh

Hi All, sorry for the trouble, but I have some problems to fix my ssh connexion to the trac server for git. (I am working on http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/12375 ) 1) My trac login is the same as my full name: Han Frederic so it contains a space, could it be a problem? Here is what I have

[sage-devel] libgiac, cython interface

Hello, I have done a cython interface for the giac library. There is a version for python and another one for sage. I have opened the following trac:http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15226 Details and examples are available on my page : http://www.math.jussieu.fr/~han/xcas/giacpy Best

[sage-devel] extcode, giac interface

Hello, The directory data/extcode/giac/user is not present after a built, so if the first user of the giac interface has not the rights to built this directory this interface can't be used. For the other interfaces this directory is in the extcode spkg. Should I open a trac for this? Best

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage and gcc 4.3.0

without any problems with gcc 4.3.2. Linux 2.6.26-2-686 #1 SMP Sun Jun 21 04:57:38 UTC 2009 i686 GNU/Linux gcc version 4.3.2 (Debian 4.3.2-1.1) -- * * * Han Frederic* * h

[sage-devel] multivariate gcd and giac interface

Hello, I have done minor updates for the giac interface. (trac 10940) I got the following bench with it: On a: model name : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU E4700 @ 2.60GHz with sage 4.6.2 compiled from sources and the giac spkg: http://www-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/~parisse/giac/giac-0_9_1.spkg (this

[sage-devel] Re: giac interface

On 4 mar, 11:49, Han Frederic h...@math.jussieu.fr wrote: Hello, I'm new to sage, I have tried to adapt the maple.py interface to obtain a giac interface for sage. The current version is there:http://www.math.jussieu.fr/~han/xcas/giac.py one needs a recent giac program. (this week

[sage-devel] giac interface

Hello, I'm new to sage, I have tried to adapt the maple.py interface to obtain a giac interface for sage. The current version is there: http://www.math.jussieu.fr/~han/xcas/giac.py one needs a recent giac program. (this week, giac --sage should gives a working session) . Bernard parisse