Hello,
I have the following error with linbox during the compilation of sage
7.4.beta4.
> ./lb-domain-type.h:31:33: fatal error: linbox/field/givaro.h: No such
file or directory
I was successfully able to compile 7.3, 7.4.beta1 and 7.4.beta2 on the same
computer.
I tried a `make distclean`
I also have problems with linbox since the update, I have attached the log
to #17635.
Le lundi 12 septembre 2016 19:50:11 UTC+2, leif a écrit :
>
> Volker Braun wrote:
> > The error is in an optional part that isn't compiled by default; I guess
> > its the maple interface? The config contains
I saw that you have already put useful part of the log on the ticket.
Thank you.
Le lundi 12 septembre 2016 19:22:42 UTC+2, leif a écrit :
>
>
>
> Presumably works if you temporarily hide your MAPLE.
>
> (I'll put a note onto the upgrade ticket [1]; you could *attach* ;-)
> your log there as
The error is in an optional part that isn't compiled by default; I guess
its the maple interface? The config contains
checking for MAPLE >= 9.0... ./configure: line 18187:
/bin/maple.system.type: No such file or directory
found
We should probably configure linbox with --with-maple=no
On
Volker Braun wrote:
> The error is in an optional part that isn't compiled by default; I guess
> its the maple interface? The config contains
>
> checking for MAPLE >= 9.0... ./configure: line 18187:
> /bin/maple.system.type: No such file or directory
> found
>
> We should probably configure
David Coudert wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have the following error with linbox during the compilation of sage
> 7.4.beta4.
>> ./lb-domain-type.h:31:33: fatal error: linbox/field/givaro.h: No such
> file or directory
>
> I was successfully able to compile 7.3, 7.4.beta1 and 7.4.beta2 on the
> same
Am 2016-09-11 um 04:01 schrieb Daniel Krenn:
> On 2016-09-10 18:36, Johan S. H. Rosenkilde wrote:
>> Without this or a similar schema, working on multiple tickets becomes
>> absolutely unbearable for me due to compilation time. How do you guys
>> cope with that?
>
> Having a version of each
Kwankyu Lee wrote:
> This happened to me. My patch for a ticket passed the doctesting by a
> patchbot A but afterward failed by another patchbot B. The reason was
> that the patchbot B has an optional package installed, and hence ran the
> optional doctests for the installed package, and my patch
This happened to me. My patch for a ticket passed the doctesting by a
patchbot A but afterward failed by another patchbot B. The reason was that
the patchbot B has an optional package installed, and hence ran the
optional doctests for the installed package, and my patch failed some of
the
Playing around with this, I found that the order of the graphic objects in
the sum matters:
graph_v + graph_spher generates the error, while graph_spher + graph_v
works fine.
Besides, the tachyon viewer works fine in both cases. Only the default 3D
viewer (jsmol) yields the error for graph_v +
10 matches
Mail list logo
