[sage-devel] Re: Build failure Sage 7.3.beta3 on Mac OS 10.9 with binary-pkg

> > I'm wondering, if we should delete the beta3 and beta0 variants to avoid > confusion? > That definitely seems like the right move to me. Nathan -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop

[sage-devel] Re: Build failure Sage 7.3.beta3 on Mac OS 10.9 with binary-pkg

On Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 8:20:49 PM UTC+2, Harald Schilly wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 8:06 PM, Karl-Dieter Crisman wrote: > > What I meant was of course for someone to take the binaries kindly > mentioned ... > ok, files landed, and one of them is 7.1 which seems to been already

[sage-devel] Re: Build failure Sage 7.3.beta3 on Mac OS 10.9 with binary-pkg

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 8:06 PM, Karl-Dieter Crisman wrote: > What I meant was of course for someone to take the binaries kindly mentioned > earlier in this thread (at http://unhyperbolic.org/sage/) and put them to > the general place, not any particular mirror. I don't have

[sage-devel] Re: Build failure Sage 7.3.beta3 on Mac OS 10.9 with binary-pkg

Volker Braun wrote: > Thats probably the shebang length limit. Can you try to reduce LENGTH in > binary_pkg/path_placeholder.py (80 or so should keep you in the limit, then) Or try exporting SAGE_BUILD_DIR (the temporary folder in which spkgs are built) with some shorter path; not sure whether

[sage-devel] Re: Build failure Sage 7.3.beta3 on Mac OS 10.9 with binary-pkg

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 7:32 PM, kcrisman wrote: > > Harald, could you do that? We could use more binaries for various versions > of OS X. I'm not building any osx binaries and I don't think anyone has push capabilities for the mit mirror. In doubt, just use the main

[sage-devel] Re: Build failure Sage 7.3.beta3 on Mac OS 10.9 with binary-pkg

> > > > Harald, could you do that? We could use more binaries for various > versions > > of OS X. > > I'm not building any osx binaries and I don't think anyone has push > capabilities for the mit mirror. In doubt, just use the main > http://files.sagemath.org/osx/intel/index.html > > What I

[sage-devel] Re: Build failure Sage 7.3.beta3 on Mac OS 10.9 with binary-pkg

Let me know about this and I will try it out. I had a LOT of trouble using binary-pkg a couple weeks ago (computer was essentially unusable for hours) and it seems to do a heck of a lot more than the old sage-bdist, so if this is the new normal it would be nice to make it as error-free as

[sage-devel] Re: Build failure Sage 7.3.beta3 on Mac OS 10.9 with binary-pkg

Thats probably the shebang length limit. Can you try to reduce LENGTH in binary_pkg/path_placeholder.py (80 or so should keep you in the limit, then) On Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 12:18:15 PM UTC-4, leif wrote: > > Nathan Dunfield wrote: > > I used the instructions on

[sage-devel] Re: Build failure Sage 7.3.beta3 on Mac OS 10.9 with binary-pkg

On Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 5:18:15 PM UTC+1, leif wrote: > > Nathan Dunfield wrote: > > I used the instructions on https://github.com/sagemath/binary-pkg > > to build sage .app.dmg > > packages for Mac OS 10.9. > > It works for 7.1

[sage-devel] Re: Build failure Sage 7.3.beta3 on Mac OS 10.9 with binary-pkg

Nathan Dunfield wrote: > I used the instructions on https://github.com/sagemath/binary-pkg > to build sage .app.dmg > packages for Mac OS 10.9. > It works for 7.1 and 7.2*, but I compiling ECL failed with the > attached log for 7.3.beta3

[sage-devel] Re: Build failure Sage 7.3.beta3 on Mac OS 10.9 with binary-pkg

> > I used the instructions on https://github.com/sagemath/binary-pkg to > build sage .app.dmg packages for Mac OS 10.9. > It works for 7.1 and 7.2*, but I compiling ECL failed with the attached > log for 7.3.beta3 - this seems to be a regression. > Weird, I was able to build the ECL in