Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 7.5.beta4 released

On Nov 29, 2016, at 23:23 , Sébastien Labbé wrote: > On OSX 10.10.2, I get two errors with make ptestlong (only the one with > singular.py reappears on a rerun) : The singular issue has appeared before, and is supposedly fixed by #21865 (the latest release of Singular). The one in trace.py I

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 7.5.beta4 released

There is really no good way to deal with this besides proper OS packages or rebuild sage from source when you do nontrivial system upgrades. On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 11:27 AM Francois Bissey < francois.bis...@canterbury.ac.nz> wrote: > libvpx has stung before. When we upgraded linbox I made sure

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 7.5.beta4 released

libvpx has stung before. When we upgraded linbox I made sure it wouldn’t be linked to openCL for sage binaries but made no provisions for regular builds. In a way with Gentoo or arch (and SuSE tumbleweed and…) we are in a unusual position compared to standard distro. Most binary distros with

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 7.5.beta4 released

So how is this sort of thing to be dealt with, in general, under Sage? For example looking at files just under local/lib I see the following libs that are linked to system libs which presumably would require a rebuild if system libs were changed local/lib/libgd.so libvpx.so.3 =>

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 7.5.beta4 released

Thanks; this worked. On Saturday, 26 November 2016 09:35:08 UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > > On 2016-11-26 07:38, Peleg Michaeli wrote: > > I have a similar error: > > Not similar. Please try again with > > $ make doc-clean > # make > > -- You received this message because you are

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 7.5.beta4 released

Didn't work (same error). Will try make doc-clean. On Saturday, 26 November 2016 09:29:58 UTC+2, François wrote: > > ./sage -p cysignals > then > make > > hopefully that should be enough. > > François > > > On 26/11/2016, at 20:26, Peleg Michaeli > wrote: > > > >

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 7.5.beta4 released

On 2016-11-26 07:38, Peleg Michaeli wrote: I have a similar error: Not similar. Please try again with $ make doc-clean # make -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-release" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 7.5.beta4 released

./sage -p cysignals then make hopefully that should be enough. François > On 26/11/2016, at 20:26, Peleg Michaeli wrote: > > What do you suggest then? make dist-clean..? > > On Saturday, 26 November 2016 08:42:59 UTC+2, François wrote: > Not similar. For some reason

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 7.5.beta4 released

What do you suggest then? make dist-clean..? On Saturday, 26 November 2016 08:42:59 UTC+2, François wrote: > > Not similar. For some reason your version of cysignals has not > been upgraded to 1.3.2 - you still have 1.1.x. > > François > > > On 26/11/2016, at 19:38, Peleg Michaeli

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 7.5.beta4 released

Yes, this seemed to have done the trick. And a few more packages were then rebuild as well. On Saturday, November 26, 2016 at 12:52:15 AM UTC-6, François wrote: > > Yes, zeromq has no recorded dependencies in sage, so it wasn’t > rebuilt. ./sage -f zeroqm and then make should solve your

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 7.5.beta4 released

Yes, zeromq has no recorded dependencies in sage, so it wasn’t rebuilt. ./sage -f zeroqm and then make should solve your problem. François > On 26/11/2016, at 19:50, Steven Trogdon wrote: > > The beta4 build was after doing a `git pull` && `make`. > > On Saturday,

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 7.5.beta4 released

The beta4 build was after doing a `git pull` && `make`. On Saturday, November 26, 2016 at 12:46:32 AM UTC-6, Steven Trogdon wrote: > > OK, after looking at the logs beta3 was built on 11/17. libsodium was > upgraded from libsodium.so.13 to libsodium.so.18 on 11/18. So there has > been a system

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 7.5.beta4 released

I am guessing it is picked up automagically by zeromq. Sage doesn’t provide it, it was detected from your system. I’ll look into it. François > On 26/11/2016, at 19:46, Steven Trogdon wrote: > > OK, after looking at the logs beta3 was built on 11/17. libsodium was >

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 7.5.beta4 released

OK, after looking at the logs beta3 was built on 11/17. libsodium was upgraded from libsodium.so.13 to libsodium.so.18 on 11/18. So there has been a system update between the build of beta3 and beta4. The question is 'is libsodium.so.18' really needed? On Saturday, November 26, 2016 at

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 7.5.beta4 released

Not similar. For some reason your version of cysignals has not been upgraded to 1.3.2 - you still have 1.1.x. François > On 26/11/2016, at 19:38, Peleg Michaeli wrote: > > I have a similar error: > > = > > [libs ] reading sources... [100%] sage/rings/pari_ring >

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 7.5.beta4 released

libsodium is not a sage package so it comes from Gentoo. libsodium.so.13 was provided by libsodium-1.0.2. All the other libsodium available in Gentoo provide libsodium.so.18. Would you have by chance been doing an upgrade rather than a build of sage from scratch - and upgraded libsodium just