[sage-release] Re: Sage 6.2.beta4 released

2014-03-17 Thread kcrisman
On Monday, March 17, 2014 4:19:26 PM UTC-4, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > On 2014-03-17, kcrisman > wrote: > > On OS X 10.4 PPC, I get the following error. Incidentally, I'm used to > GAP > > compiling toward the very end of the process on this machine, so I was > > surprised it showed up relati

[sage-release] Re: Sage 6.2.beta4 released

2014-03-17 Thread Dima Pasechnik
On 2014-03-17, kcrisman wrote: > On OS X 10.4 PPC, I get the following error. Incidentally, I'm used to GAP > compiling toward the very end of the process on this machine, so I was > surprised it showed up relatively early. I'd be grateful for any hints; > looks like includes in the wrong ord

[sage-release] Re: Sage 6.2.beta4 released

2014-03-17 Thread Jean-Pierre Flori
On Monday, March 17, 2014 3:46:54 PM UTC+1, kcrisman wrote: > > > >>> Also, a few questions. >>> >>> 1) We used to be able to just "fake" an installation by touching a >>> certain file. I assume that touching the log file in logs/pkgs would not >>> suffice here, though? >>> >> > > Thanks for t

[sage-release] Re: Sage 6.2.beta4 released

2014-03-17 Thread kcrisman
> >> Also, a few questions. >> >> 1) We used to be able to just "fake" an installation by touching a >> certain file. I assume that touching the log file in logs/pkgs would not >> suffice here, though? >> > Thanks for those pointers! So... would touching one of the files in the installed li

[sage-release] Re: Sage 6.2.beta4 released

2014-03-17 Thread Jean-Pierre Flori
On Monday, March 17, 2014 3:35:17 PM UTC+1, kcrisman wrote: > > On OS X 10.4 PPC, I get the following error. Incidentally, I'm used to > GAP compiling toward the very end of the process on this machine, so I was > surprised it showed up relatively early. I'd be grateful for any hints; > look

[sage-release] Re: Sage 6.2.beta4 released

2014-03-17 Thread kcrisman
On OS X 10.4 PPC, I get the following error. Incidentally, I'm used to GAP compiling toward the very end of the process on this machine, so I was surprised it showed up relatively early. I'd be grateful for any hints; looks like includes in the wrong order or something, but I may be interpret