On 2012-02-19 00:12, John H Palmieri wrote:
Next, there is now no longer a /Developer directory, which means that
the command xcodebuild (which is run by the prereq script) may fail to
report the correct version of Xcode. So from the shell, you need to run
$ xcode-select -switch
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 07:55, Jeroen Demeyer jdeme...@cage.ugent.be wrote:
On 2012-02-19 00:12, John H Palmieri wrote:
Next, there is now no longer a /Developer directory, which means that
the command xcodebuild (which is run by the prereq script) may fail to
report the correct version of
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 14:00, entropy jberw...@gmail.com wrote:
John,
Just to confirm, did this build work for you on Lion 10.7.2, with
Xcode 4.3, and gcc version 4.2.1 (LLVM build 2336.9.00)? From you
follow-up messages I am assuming that beta4-gcc still builds a copy of
gcc-4.6 on top of
On Sunday, February 19, 2012 11:49:23 PM UTC-8, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
On 2012-02-19 06:53, John H Palmieri wrote:
On the plus side, on the laptop where I had problems before, Sage built
and passed all doctests using the default compiler:
You mean 5.0.beta4 worked or do you mean my
On Monday, February 20, 2012 7:53:05 AM UTC-8, John H Palmieri wrote:
On Sunday, February 19, 2012 11:49:23 PM UTC-8, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
On 2012-02-19 06:53, John H Palmieri wrote:
On the plus side, on the laptop where I had problems before, Sage built
and passed all doctests using
On 2012-02-20 20:47, John H Palmieri wrote:
With plain 5.0.beta4, I have the same problems as with earlier versions
of Sage: pari fails self-tests, symmetrica gives a doctest failure in
the Sage library, etc.
That's not unexpected, thanks for testing!
--
To post to this group, send an email
On 2012-02-19 06:53, John H Palmieri wrote:
On the plus side, on the laptop where I had problems before, Sage built
and passed all doctests using the default compiler:
You mean 5.0.beta4 worked or do you mean my 5.0.beta4-gcc?
--
To post to this group, send an email to
We have another small problem with Lion. I just wiped my hard drive and
reinstalled Lion (because of some non-Sage related issues). Then I
reinstalled Xcode: the newly released version 4.3. Two issues:
command-line tools are no longer installed by default, so you have to
install gcc, clang,
On Saturday, February 18, 2012 3:12:19 PM UTC-8, John H Palmieri wrote:
We have another small problem with Lion. I just wiped my hard drive and
reinstalled Lion (because of some non-Sage related issues). Then I
reinstalled Xcode: the newly released version 4.3. Two issues:
command-line
I think we should only compile using clang when xcode is version 4+.
Clang is relatively new, and I don't think that it would be wise to
rely on the older versions, especially when gcc-4.2 worked so well for
sage (at least pre gcc spkg).
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 23:40, Jeroen Demeyer
John: concerning your laptop failure and the clang fix: the problem
might also be one of the *dependencies* of GCC: mpir, mpfr or mpc. So
could you try to build Sage with clang, remove GCC and then build GCC
with gcc:
(after downloading and extracting the source)
$ CC=clang make
[... hours pass
On Wednesday, February 15, 2012 10:21:40 PM UTC-8, John H Palmieri wrote:
On Wednesday, February 15, 2012 7:59:16 AM UTC-8, John H Palmieri wrote:
On Tuesday, February 14, 2012 10:50:52 AM UTC-8, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
John, entropy, Could you try the following:
$ rm
On 2012-02-17 06:28, John H Palmieri wrote:
On several desktop machines, which didn't have problems building Sage
without using clang, using clang also worked: all self-tests (except
python and cvxopt) passed, and all of Sage's tests passed.
On a laptop which failed to build without clang,
On 2012-02-17 06:28, John H Palmieri wrote:
Unhandled SIGABRT: An abort() occurred in Sage.
This probably occurred because a *compiled* component of Sage has a bug
in it and is not properly wrapped with sig_on(),
On 2012-02-17 06:28, John H Palmieri wrote:
On a laptop which failed to build without clang, using clang mostly
worked, except (building either with or without SAGE_CHECK), I got this
doctest failure:
On this laptop on which GCC failed to build with Apple's gcc, could you
please try to build
On 2012-02-14 23:24, entropy wrote:
woohoo! Success as well using
$ CC=clang CXX=clang++ MAKE=make -j1 ./sage -f spkg/standard/
gcc-4.6.2.spkg
Successfully installed gcc-4.6.2
Now cleaning up tmp files.
Finished installing gcc-4.6.2.spkg (!!)
Could you do the same with SAGE_CHECK=yes
On 2012-02-15 03:10, John H Palmieri wrote:
Why would it switch over to gcc? Wouldn't this use clang for any spkg
which respects the CC environment variable, regardless of the presence
of SAGE_ROOT/local/bin/gcc?
Currently, I set up #12369 such that it always uses gcc if the GCC spkg
has been
On 2012-02-14 23:57, entropy wrote:
To be clear, after gcc-4.6.2 built and installed, in
order to restart the build process, I simply typed make again in the
sage root directory. Is it necessary to modify this command if one
restarts a build process? Or is my problem that the built process
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 1:55 PM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 12:42 PM, R. Andrew Ohana
andrew.oh...@gmail.com wrote:
You could also try
$ CC=clang CXX=clang++ MAKE=make -j1 ./sage -f spkg/standard/gcc-4.6.2.spkg
One of the main points of the gcc spkg is
On Tuesday, February 14, 2012 10:50:52 AM UTC-8, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
John, entropy, Could you try the following:
$ rm spkg/logs/gcc-4.6.2.log
$ MAKE=make -j1 SAGE_CHECK=yes CFLAGS=-O0 ./sage -f
spkg/standard/gcc-4.6.2.spkg
If it fails, send me spkg/logs/gcc-4.6.2.log
It failed. Log:
On Wednesday, February 15, 2012 7:59:16 AM UTC-8, John H Palmieri wrote:
On Tuesday, February 14, 2012 10:50:52 AM UTC-8, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
John, entropy, Could you try the following:
$ rm spkg/logs/gcc-4.6.2.log
$ MAKE=make -j1 SAGE_CHECK=yes CFLAGS=-O0 ./sage -f
On sage1.cs.washington.ede (where compiling works), gcc --version gives:
i686-apple-darwin11-llvm-gcc-4.2 (GCC) 4.2.1 (Based on Apple Inc. build
5658) (LLVM build 2336.1.00)
With entropy's log of a failed build:
i686-apple-darwin11-llvm-gcc-4.2 (GCC) 4.2.1 (Based on Apple Inc. build
5658)
On Monday, February 13, 2012 11:51:50 PM UTC-8, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
On 2012-02-13 19:05, John H Palmieri wrote:
I posted the same failure two days ago to the relevant trac ticket,
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12369.
Not the same failure, your failure on #12369 was an
John, entropy, Could you try the following:
$ rm spkg/logs/gcc-4.6.2.log
$ MAKE=make -j1 SAGE_CHECK=yes CFLAGS=-O0 ./sage -f
spkg/standard/gcc-4.6.2.spkg
If it fails, send me spkg/logs/gcc-4.6.2.log
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from
You could also try
$ CC=clang CXX=clang++ MAKE=make -j1 ./sage -f spkg/standard/gcc-4.6.2.spkg
One of the main points of the gcc spkg is because llvm-gcc is buggy,
clang should be just as able to build gcc, and doesn't suffer from the
same bugs as llvm-gcc does with pari and symmetrica.
On Tue,
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 1:55 PM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 12:42 PM, R. Andrew Ohana
andrew.oh...@gmail.com wrote:
You could also try
$ CC=clang CXX=clang++ MAKE=make -j1 ./sage -f spkg/standard/gcc-4.6.2.spkg
One of the main points of the gcc spkg is
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 14:57, entropy jberw...@gmail.com wrote:
Darn, flopped again. The mpir package could not find a working
compiler. Kind of ironic, since this whole thread has been about
building gcc-4.6.2. :) From the log, it seems to have found the
system's gcc (4.2.1, the same one
On Tuesday, February 14, 2012 5:14:13 PM UTC-8, R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 14:57, entropy wrote:
Darn, flopped again. The mpir package could not find a working
compiler. Kind of ironic, since this whole thread has been about
building gcc-4.6.2. :) From the log, it
On 02/13/12 04:51 PM, entropy wrote:
Hi all,
This is wonderful news. So great, that I tried to compile
sage-5.0beta3 on my OS X 10.7.2 laptop. Sadly, it threw an error while
attempting to compile gcc4.6.2. Hopefully someone may have more
expertise than me. Below is the bottom of the build log
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 8:51 AM, entropy jberw...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
This is wonderful news. So great, that I tried to compile
sage-5.0beta3 on my OS X 10.7.2 laptop. Sadly, it threw an error while
attempting to compile gcc4.6.2. Hopefully someone may have more
expertise than me.
On Monday, February 13, 2012 9:55:43 AM UTC-8, William wrote:
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 8:51 AM, entropy wrote:
Hi all,
This is wonderful news. So great, that I tried to compile
sage-5.0beta3 on my OS X 10.7.2 laptop. Sadly, it threw an error while
attempting to compile gcc4.6.2.
On Monday, February 13, 2012 10:05:56 AM UTC-8, John H Palmieri wrote:
Or is there something about the laptop architecture which is causing the
problem?
It would be useful if people would post the output of uname -a with the
success/failure reports in this thread.
--
To post to this
On Monday, February 13, 2012 11:49:29 AM UTC-8, Volker Braun wrote:
On Monday, February 13, 2012 10:05:56 AM UTC-8, John H Palmieri wrote:
Or is there something about the laptop architecture which is causing the
problem?
It would be useful if people would post the output of uname -a
On 2012-02-13 19:05, John H Palmieri wrote:
I posted the same failure two days ago to the relevant trac ticket,
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12369.
Not the same failure, your failure on #12369 was an internal compiler
error: segmentation fault
--
To post to this group, send an
On 2012-02-13 18:55, William Stein wrote:
It fails in *exactly* the same way for me on my laptop.
William (or somebody else), could you pack the whole
$SAGE_ROOT/spkg/build/gcc-4.6.2 directory in a tarball for me such that
I can have a look at log files?
Also send me
35 matches
Mail list logo
