Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.9.rc0 released

Le samedi 14 septembre 2019 10:50:07 UTC+2, Dima Pasechnik a écrit : [ Snip... ] > > I am aware of this issue: it's something coming from GAP's package > Semigroups. I'm in touch with GAP people to sort it out. > > Dima > Thank you Dima for letting us know. I reported this for exhaustivity

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.9.rc1 released

Hmmm... This one is nasty... On Debian testing running on core i5 + 8 GB RAM, upgrading from 8.9.rc0, I get: Transient errors: src/sage/combinat/posets/posets.py 1 doctest failed src/sage/plot/animate.py 7 doctests failed src/sage/combinat/matrices/ha

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.9.rc1 released

e well-known failure related to FLINT. Currently running ptestalllong on this other machine. Le mercredi 25 septembre 2019 14:45:00 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > Hmmm... This one is nasty... > > On Debian testing running on core i5 + 8 GB RAM, upgrading from 8.9.rc0, I &g

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.9.rc1 released

mercredi 25 septembre 2019 16:03:12 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > Forgot to specify that these results were for ptestalllong, which is now > pertinent for Python 3-based Sage... > > Incidentally, testing on another machine a patch for ticket Trac#28534 > <https://trac

[sage-release] Re: Sage 8.9.rc1 released

tembre 2019 14:45:00 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > Hmmm... This one is nasty... > > On Debian testing running on core i5 + 8 GB RAM, upgrading from 8.9.rc0, I > get: > > Transient errors: > > src/sage/combinat/posets/posets.py

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta0 released

On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, upgrading a Python3-based Sage 8.9 to 9.0.beta0 + Trac#28534 (marked as fixed), ptestalllong gives - one permanent failure on src/sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_rational_flint.pyx (already re

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta1 released

On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16bGB RAM, an upgrade of 9.0.beta0 + Python3 to 9.0.beta1 tested with ptestalllong gives extremely similar results (no failure we haven't seen already) : Transient failures: File| Result -

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta1 released

efore ; however, the persistent of transient failures when testing *serially* is perplexing... HTH, Le dimanche 13 octobre 2019 15:31:40 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16bGB RAM, an upgrade of 9.0.beta0 > + Python3 to 9.0.bet

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta2 released

FWIW, on Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, upgrading a Python3-based 9.0.beta1 to 9.0.beta2 gives the same results as previous upgrades ("Plus çà change, plus c'est la même chose"): Permanent failures: File| Result

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta2 released

| 2 doctests failed src/sage/repl/load.py | 1 doctest failed src/sage/interfaces/magma_free.py | 2 doctests failed HTH, Le vendredi 25 octobre 2019 23:57:04 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > FWIW, on Debian testing r

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta3 released

On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, the upgrade of a Python 3-base 9.0.beta2 to 9.0.beta3 gives results close to those already reported: Permanent failures : File| Result -

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta3 released

UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, the upgrade of a Python > 3-base 9.0.beta2 to 9.0.beta3 gives results close to those already reported: > > Permanent failures : > > File

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta4 released

FWIW, on Debian testing running on core i5 + 8 GB RAM, ptestalllong gets similar results : - No permanent failure (yay !) - Eleven transient failures, all already seen in previous 9.x betas : File | Result ---

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta4 released

this one). HTH, Le mercredi 6 novembre 2019 13:58:50 UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > FWIW, on Debian testing running on core i5 + 8 GB RAM, ptestalllong gets > similar results : > >- No permanent failure (yay !) >- Eleven transient failures, all already se

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta5 released

FWIW, upgrading a Python 3-based 9.0.beta4 to 9.0.beta5 on Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB Ram gives me ptestalllong results quite close to those already reported for previous betas: - No failure for ptestlong-related doctests - One permanent failure on src/sage/tests/gap_package

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta5 released

failed src/sage/interfaces/magma_free.py | 2 doctests failed HTH, Le lundi 11 novembre 2019 09:49:02 UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > FWIW, upgrading a Python 3-based 9.0.beta4 to 9.0.beta5 on Debian testing > running on core i7 + 16 GB Ram gives me ptestalllong resu

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta6 released

On Debian testing runninng on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, ptestalllong my Python 3-based 9.0.beta5 upgraded to 9.0.beta6 gave me the same permanent ant transient failures as before AND two transient failures I don't remember having seen before: File | Result

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta6 released

On a slightly smaller machine (Debian testing running on core i5 + 8 GB RAM), the same upgrade give me the same results minus the two "new" transient failures. HTH, Le lundi 18 novembre 2019 16:00:48 UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > On Debian testing runninng on cor

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta6 released

I reported similar problems since I started to use ptestalllong on Python3-based Sagemath. In the present case, I just checked that *each* of these tests passes when (manually) ran standalone. Since - I get the same problems when running testallong (i. e. nnot* parallel), - the lis of y

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta7 released

Doubleplusungood... On Deboan testing running on core i5 + 8 GB RAM, ptestalllong gets me (part of) the usual suspects (transient failures, plus 6 (six) permanent failures due to abort: | File | Result | P/T | |--

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta7 released

ma_free.py | 2 doctests > failed| T | > > Details: see enclosed checkerrs2.txt > > HTH, > > > Le mercredi 27 novembre 2019 14:56:36 UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : >> >>

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta7 released

*THIS WAS A MISTAKE: *those resuts are for *9.0.beta6*, not *beta7*. Rebuilding beta7 and tests underway... Sorry for the noise... Le mercredi 27 novembre 2019 22:07:14 UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > I tried to recompile from scratch (i. e. make distclean ; make ; > resin

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta7 released

d it's harmless. > > (I set it to 4.63 to cover many more Linux distros) > > > > On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 9:28 PM Emmanuel Charpentier > > > wrote: > > > > > > THIS WAS A MISTAKE: those resuts are for 9.0.beta6, not beta7. > Rebuilding beta7 a

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta7 released

binat/posets/posets.py # 1 doctest failed sage -t --long src/sage/combinat/matrices/hadamard_matrix.py # 2 doctests failed sage -t --long src/sage/misc/latex.py # 1 doctest failed sage -t --long src/sage/combinat/designs/ext_rep.py # 2 doctests failed sage -t --long src/sage/coding/databases.p

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta7 released

(not a boolean or fail) executing \$sage1:=AtlasGenerators("J2",2).generators;; > > here is a ticket that improves this function by switching from GAP to > libGAP interface, > please review > https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/28818 > > Perhaps that was

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta7 released

from GAP to > libGAP interface, > please review > https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/28818 > > Perhaps that was the general flakiness of pexpect that caused that > failure. > > Dima > > > > ? > > > > > > On Thu, 28 Nov 2019, 19:06

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta7 released

Well... applying Trac#28818 <https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/28818> didn't solve my problem. I cut'n'pasted the end of what is printed by make ptestalllong in the enclosed file end_of_ptestalllong.txt. HTH... Le vendredi 29 novembre 2019 11:19:41 UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpenti

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta7 released

/atlasrep/ > Note that the package archives do NOT contain the database part of the > package; the GAP interface accesses the data on demand via the > internet. > > On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 11:35 AM Emmanuel Charpentier > > wrote: > > > > Well... applying Trac

Re: [sage-release] Sage 9.0.beta8 released

Dear Madison, Does this ticket address a Windows-specific issue, or does testiong it is meaningful under Linux/Mac Os ? Le lundi 2 décembre 2019 12:11:33 UTC+1, E. Madison Bray a écrit : > > Can I please get a review on https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/28258 ? > > This issue has been holding me

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta8 released

On Debian testing running on Core i5 + 8 GB RAM, (after removal of gap_packages, problematic on this machine, see reports on 9.0.beta7), ptestalllong gets me the usual suspects:10 transient issues (i. e. all tests pass when ran standalone), and no permanent issue : Running doctests with ID 2019

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta8 released

nent failures proves, IMHO, that our corporate firewall is incompatible with the needs of gap_packages. How should I ticket this ? Le lundi 2 décembre 2019 14:33:06 UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > On Debian testing running on Core i5 + 8 GB RAM, (after removal of > gap_packages, pr

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta7 released

Followup (IMHO demonstrative) in this post <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sage-release/bTgyAkXVymw/DmMx7daiAwAJ> related to 9.0.beta8. HTH, Le dimanche 1 décembre 2019 13:39:15 UTC+1, Dima Pasechnik a écrit : > > On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 1:36 PM Emmanuel Charpentie

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta9 released

On Debian testing running on core i5 + 8 GB RAM, upgrading a 9.0.beta8 Python3-based Sage and running ptestalllong gives nine transient failures and no permanent one: | File | Result| |---+--

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta9 released

/sage/combinat/designs/ext_rep.py | 1 doctest failed | T src/sage/databases/findstat.py | 1 doctest failed | Y All of these failures have already been reported. HTH, Le lundi 9 décembre 2019 14:24:34 UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > On Debian testing runn

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta9 released

I'd add Trac#28884 (another Dima' ticket to which I just gave positive review) to this suggestion (a large headache off the shoulders of Sage's R users...). This might even justify one more week before 9.0... Le dimanche 15 décembre 2019 12:49:51 UTC+1,

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta10 released

On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, ptestalllong after upgrade of a a Python 3-based Sage 9.0.beta9 to 9.0.beta10 gets 6 transient and 3 permanent failures: File Result P/T src/sage/databases/findstat.py 1 doctest failed T src/sage/plot/animate.py 7 doctests failed T src/sage/i

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.beta10 released

Dear list, Le mardi 24 décembre 2019 16:36:19 UTC+1, Volker Braun a écrit : > > As always, you can get the latest beta version from the "develop" git > branch. Alternatively, the self-contained source tarball is at > http://www.sagemath.org/download-latest.html > > I'm thinking this should be t

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.rc0 released

FWIW, on Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, after upgrading a Python 3-based Sage 9.0.beta10 to 9.0.rc0, ptestalllong gives 4 transient and 3 permanent failures: File Result P/T src/sage/plot/animate.py 7 doctests failed T src/sage/numerical/backends/glpk_backend.pyx 1 doctest fai

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0.rc0 released

2 of 8 in sage.interfaces.octave.Octave 1 of 6 in sage.interfaces.octave.Octave.solve_linear_system [132 tests, 3 failures, 1.93 s] Those 4 “new” transient failures are all bound to the use of octave, whose interface may benefit from revision (but the fact that these doctests pass wh

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0 released

Congratulations ! And atriple ban four the release manager, who managed to get a Python 3-base Sage just in time. Kudos... Le mercredi 1 janvier 2020 13:15:15 UTC+1, Volker Braun a écrit : > > Just in time for the new decade, > Mandatory nitpick: the second decade of the 21ts century CE shall en

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0 released

On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM after upgrading a Python 3-based 9.0.rc0 to 9.0, ptestalllong gets 7 transient and 3 permanent failures: File Result P/T src/sage/symbolic/integration/external.py 1 doctest failed T src/sage/interfaces/psage.py 1 doctest failed T src/sage/modu

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0 released

Le jeudi 2 janvier 2020 16:06:05 UTC+1, kcrisman a écrit : > > > > On Wednesday, January 1, 2020 at 5:45:51 PM UTC-5, Emmanuel Charpentier > wrote: >> >> Congratulations ! And atriple ban four the release manager, who managed >> to get a Python 3-base Sag

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.0 released

doctests failed T External software detected for doctesting: ffmpeg,graphviz,imagemagick,internet,latex,mathematica,octave,pandoc HTH, Le jeudi 2 janvier 2020 01:57:24 UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM after upgrading a Python > 3-based

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta0 released

On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, upgrading a Python 3-based Sage 9.0 to 9.1.beta0 and running ptestalllong gets 3 permanent and 5 transient failures: File Result P/T src/sage/databases/oeis.py 1 doctest failed T src/sage/plot/animate.py 7 doctests failed T src/sage/numerical

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta0 released

What happens when you re-run these failed test standalone (i. e. one at a time) ? Le samedi 11 janvier 2020 13:59:09 UTC+1, Jaap Spies a écrit : > > On Rasbian (see below) > > make ptestlong ended with: > > -- > Total time for al

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta0 released

,imagemagick,internet,latex,mathematica,octave,pandoc HTH, Le samedi 11 janvier 2020 14:07:34 UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, upgrading a Python > 3-based Sage 9.0 to 9.1.beta0 and running ptestalllong gets 3 permanent > and 5 tra

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta1 released

On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, after upgrading a Python 3-based 9.1.beta0 to 9.1.bet1, ptestalllong gets 5 transient and 3 permanent failures: File Result P/T src/sage/plot/animate.py 7 doctests failed T src/sage/databases/oeis.py 1 doctest failed T src/sage/tests/gap_packa

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta2 released

src/sage/libs/glpk/error.pyx 1 doctest failed P And findstat.py, ran standalone, succeeds. This is annoying... I have no clue about the source of the problem. Le mardi 28 janvier 2020 16:15:21 UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : On Debian testing running on core I5 + 8 GB RAM, upgrading

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta2 released

Makefile:70: all] Error 2 make[4]: Leaving directory '/usr/local/sage-9/local/var/tmp/sage/build/ecl-16.1.2.p5/src' Error building ecl-16.1.2.p5 ********

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta2 released

Indeed : make has failed with the same failure as before. To confirm this, I'll distclean and retry, but don't believe it will be successful. Kep you posted. HTH, Le vendredi 31 janvier 2020 20:17:57 UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > > > Le vendredi 31 janvier 202

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta2 released

2020 at 7:22 PM Emmanuel Charpentier > > wrote: > > > > Indeed : make has failed with the same failure as before. To confirm > this, I'll distclean and retry, but don't believe it will be successful. > Kep you posted. > > > > HTH, > >

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta2 released

Le vendredi 31 janvier 2020 22:14:59 UTC+1, Dima Pasechnik a écrit : > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 8:58 PM Emmanuel Charpentier > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Le vendredi 31 janvier 2020 21:50:55 UTC+1, Dima Pasechnik a écrit : > >> > >>

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta2 released

> > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 9:33 PM Emmanuel Charpentier > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Le vendredi 31 janvier 2020 22:14:59 UTC+1, Dima Pasechnik a écrit : > >> > >> On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 8:58 PM Emmanuel Charpentier > >> wrote:

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta2 released

package: ecl-16.1.2.p5 last build time: févr. 1 00:30 log file:/usr/local/sage-9/logs/pkgs/ecl-16.1.2.p5.log build directory: /usr/local/sage-9/local/var/tmp/sage/build/ecl-16.1.2.p5 I'm leaving this for tonight (re-switching to my many-times upgraded tree). Let me k

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta3 released

After upgrading Sage 9.2.beta2 to 9.2.beta3 on Deban testing running on core i5 + 8 GB RAM: - ptestlong passes with no failures; - ptestalllong fails when running findstat.py ; this kills findstat.py, octave.py, magma_free.py, src/doc/en/faq/index.rst, src/doc/en/prep/Logging-On.rs

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta3 released

findstat.py, leading to the interruption of other running tests. These results look identical to what has been already reported for 9.1.beta2. HTH, Le vendredi 7 février 2020 14:41:32 UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > After upgrading Sage 9.2.beta2 to 9.2.beta3 on Deban t

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta3 released

raising the number of open files (ulimit -n 4096, instead of the default 1024). HTH, Le samedi 8 février 2020 13:47:12 UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > On a similar setup^(corei7 + 16 GB RAM, Debian testing, no local proxy, > gap_packages installed), upgrading 9.1.beta2 t

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta3 released

for doctesting: ffmpeg,graphviz,imagemagick,internet,latex,mathematica,pandoc This hints at a (concurrency ?) problem in the test infrastructure itseff... HTH, Le dimanche 9 février 2020 13:50:57 UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : On the same setup, rebuilding 9.1.beta3 + Trac#21811

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta4 released

On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM: - I was unable to upgrade 9.1.beta3 + #21811 to this version, the build failing to find the libraries for M4RI (that were present). This persisted after reinstallation of these libraries, and even after ./configure. I succeeeded by re

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta4 released

* 1 item had failures: 1 of 29 in sage.matrix.matrix_double_dense.Matrix_double_dense.is_unitary [650 tests, 1 failure, 1.20 s] HTH, Le samedi 15 février 2020 19:35:49 UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM: > >- I was unable to upgr

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta6 released

On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, after full rebuild (in order to include as much system packages as possible), ptestlong gives six permanent (and no transient) failures: Running doctests with ID 2020-03-07-22-30-55-fe0c1ecc. Git branch: develop Using --optional=build,dochtml,

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.beta9 released

On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, upgrading 9.1.beta6 to 9.1.beta9 gets 13 permanent errors : -- sage -t --long src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_number_field.py # 5 doctests failed sage -t --long src/sage/sc

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.rc3 released

On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, rebuilding 9.1.rc2 afresh (make distclean, make config , ./configure, make ptestlong) leads to ten permanent errors: File Result P/T src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_number_field.py 3 doctests failed P src/sage/rings/number_field/number_fi

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.rc3 released

e des informations d'état... Fait libcdd-dev est déjà la version la plus récente (094j-2). libcdd-tools est déjà la version la plus récente (094j-2). 0 mis à jour, 0 nouvellement installés, 0 à enlever et 0 non mis à jour. HTH, Le mercredi 6 mai 2020 17:36:07 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : >

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.rc5 released

On Debian testing, upgrading from 9.1.rc3 fails early on longsl23 not beaing resent (I have libgsl25). Is there a way to avoid rebuilding from scratch (make distclean...) ? Le jeudi 14 mai 2020 00:41:44 UTC+2, Volker Braun a écrit : > > As always, you can get the latest beta version from the "d

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.rc5 released

Okay. How do you uninstall them ? The ./sage -advanced commmand doesn't suggest anything... Le jeudi 14 mai 2020 22:36:30 UTC+2, Matthias Köppe a écrit : > > On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 1:02:38 PM UTC-7, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: >> >> On Debian testing, upgrading fr

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.rc5 released

42:08 UTC+2, Dima Pasechnik a écrit : > > make cvxopt-clean > > > > On Fri, 15 May 2020 at 06:27, Emmanuel Charpentier > wrote: > >> Okay. How do you uninstall them ? The ./sage -advanced commmand doesn't >> suggest anything... >> >>

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.rc5 released

which you had to uninstall just as you did for cvxopt > > > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 9:48 AM Emmanuel Charpentier > > wrote: > > > > Thank you, Dima ! > > > > However, this isn't enough. Friom the relevant portion of install.log : > > >

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.rc5 released

Nothing : charpent@zen-book-flip:/usr/local/sage-9$ ls -l $SAGE_LOCAL/lib/*gsl* ls: impossible d'accéder à '/lib/*gsl*': Aucun fichier ou dossier de ce type Le vendredi 15 mai 2020 11:08:28 UTC+2, Dima Pasechnik a écrit : > > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 9:59 AM Emmanuel C

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.rc5 released

And, BTW, charpent@zen-book-flip:/usr/local/sage-9$ SAGE_LOCAL=local ls -l $SAGE_LOCAL/lib/*gsl* ls: impossible d'accéder à '/lib/*gsl*': Aucun fichier ou dossier de ce type Le vendredi 15 mai 2020 11:34:30 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > Nothing : > >

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.rc5 released

d'accéder à '/usr/local/sage-9/local/lib/*gsl*': Aucun fichier ou dossier de ce type (sage-sh) charpent@zen-book-flip:sage-9$ exit exit Exited Sage subshell. Le vendredi 15 mai 2020 12:29:46 UTC+2, Dima Pasechnik a écrit : > > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 10:34 AM Emmanuel Charpentier

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.rc5 released

Well, I'm still stuck. A data point : inna dplicate of this tree, make distclean, make config, ./configure, make succeeds in buildig Sage 9.1.rc5. ptestlong underway. HTH, Le vendredi 15 mai 2020 13:21:35 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > Same difference : > > charp

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.rc5 released

/number_field/unit_group.py 1 doctest failed P src/sage/libs/glpk/error.pyx 1 doctest failed P The timeout wasn’t observed already ; all other errors were. The result of the retesting of initially failing tests is attached as chkerrs.txt. HTH, Le samedi 16 mai 2020 12:22:44 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.1.rc5 released

Forgotten attachment... Le samedi 16 mai 2020 14:47:50 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM: > >- upgrading 9.1.rc3 to 9.1.rc5 via make ptestlong *fails* (see above) ; >- rebuilding afresh (make distclean ; make confi

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.2.beta0 released

On Debian testing running o core i7 + 16 GB RAM, pulling Trac#28656 on top of a 9.1 rebuilt from make distclean (using all the system packages ecommended by ./config) leads to 11 failures (and 1 timeout, which doesn’t when ran standalone) : File Result

[sage-release] Re: Upgrading to Sage 9.2.beta2. Pb in doc.

Same snag when upgrading 9.1.beta1 to 9.1.beta2 on Debian testong running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM. make doc-clean doesn't work here either. Trying make-distclean... HTH, Le samedi 27 juin 2020 07:29:04 UTC+2, tdumont a écrit : > > When upgrading from 9.1 to 9.2, building the doc: > 1) > > [ref

Re: [sage-release] Re: Upgrading to Sage 9.2.beta2. Pb in doc.

a la > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Treachery_of_Images#/media/File:MagrittePipe.jpg > > > nor an error. > > On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 1:59 PM David Coudert > wrote: > > > > same issue here on macOS after upgrading from beta1 > > > > > > Le 27 juin

[sage-release] Re: Upgrading to Sage 9.2.beta2. Pb in doc.

Le samedi 27 juin 2020 16:04:09 UTC+2, Jonathan Kliem a écrit : > > Looks like the same problem we had on > https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/27122#comment:64 > > Are you compiling with CFLAGS containing `-march=native` or similiar? > I dunno : just doing "make distclean ; ./configure ; make".

Re: [sage-release] Re: Upgrading to Sage 9.2.beta2. Pb in doc.

ce] WARNING: l'entrée html_static_path > '/home/dimpase/sage/src/doc/common/static' n'existe pas > ... > OSError: WARNING: l'entrée html_static_path > '/home/dimpase/sage/src/doc/common/static' n'existe pas > > > > > > El sábado, 27

Re: [sage-release] Re: Upgrading to Sage 9.2.beta2. Pb in doc.

Le samedi 27 juin 2020 18:15:13 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > Yay ! " export LANG=C.UTF-8 ; make " *seems* to bulld the documentation. > Well, that worked. With qualification : After this (successful) build of the documentation, "make" in an environm

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.2.beta3 released

On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, after, upgrading 9.2.beta2 to 9.2.beta3, ptestlong yelds the same results as 9.2.beta2. HTH Le mardi 7 juillet 2020 09:21:29 UTC+2, Volker Braun a écrit : > > As always, yo

Re: [sage-release] Sage 9.3.beta4 released

On Debian testing running on core i5 + 8 GB Ram, after upgrading from 9.2.beta2 to 9.2.beta4, ptestlong gives results identical to those already reported for 9.2.beta2 and 9.2.beta3 : permanent failures on gp_packages, real_arb and complex_arb. HTH, Le jeudi 9 juillet 2020 12:40:23 UTC+2, tdu

Re: [sage-release] Sage 9.3.beta4 released

Identical results (modulo a couple of timeouts) on Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, upgraded from 9.2.beta3. HTH, Le jeudi 9 juillet 2020 13:24:13 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > On Debian testing running on core i5 + 8 GB Ram, after upgrading from > 9.2.bet

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.2.beta5 released

On Debian testing running on ore i7 + 16 GB RAM, upgrading a rebuilt Sage 9.2.beta4 to 9.2.beta5 and running ptestlong~ gives one transient timeout and three permanent errors: File Result P/T src/sage/tests/parigp.py Timed out T src/sage/rings/complex_arb.pyx 6 doctests failed P src/sage/tes

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.2.beta5 released

not exist: 4e45ede1-0b60-4cd6-be87-e8cc02f05161) in Sage's jupyter. see https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/30123 > I pointed your answer in this ticket. Thanks a lot ! On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 3:44 PM Emmanuel Charpentier > wrote: > >> On Debian testing running on ore

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.2.beta7 released

ISTR that make build may unhose you, even if sage -b is (temporarily ?) broken. HTH Le lundi 3 août 2020 12:52:15 UTC+2, Eric Gourgoulhon a écrit : Upgrading from Sage 9.2.beta6, the Jupyter notebook is broken: opening a > notebook results in a blank page, with the following error message in

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.2.beta7 released

On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, upgrading from 9.2.beta5 + Trac#29441 , configured to use as much system packages as possible, gives one (transient) timeout and three (permanent) failures, all already reported in previous betas :

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.2.beta7 released

Of note : I lost the ability to launch the Jupyter notebook, as reported in Trac#30123 <https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/30123> ; the make build workaround doesn’t work around this bug anymore. HTH, Le lundi 3 août 2020 23:18:11 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : On Debian t

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.2.beta8 released

On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, upgrading 9.2.beta7 configured for use of all possible system libraries an runningptestlong gets me the same transient an same three permanent failures already reported for 9.2.beta7 and 9.2.beta5 : sage -t --long --warn-long 175.4 --random-s

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.2.beta8 released

ears in the terminal window from which I launched emacs ; nothing unusual in the *Messages* buffer either. I’m stymied… ​ Le mardi 11 août 2020 13:39:38 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, upgrading 9.2.beta7 > configured f

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.2.beta8 released

I I filed [this issue](https://github.com/sagemath/sage-shell-mode/issues/53) against `sage-shell-mode` on Github. HTH, Le mardi 11 août 2020 17:39:29 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > Damn ! > > This release breaks sage-shell-mode support for a sage session into &g

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 9.2.beta8 released

> On Tuesday, August 11, 2020 at 8:48:43 AM UTC-7, Dima Pasechnik wrote: >> >> it is probably a newer iPython that gives this, nothing Sage-specific it >> seems. >> >> On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 4:47 PM Emmanuel Charpentier >> wrote: >> > >> &

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.2.beta8 released

… HTH, ​ Le mardi 11 août 2020 17:39:29 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > Damn ! > > This release breaks sage-shell-mode support for a sage session into > emacs. After starting an emacs session, I get the normal banner and a > normal prompt. A little while after th

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.2.beta8 released

) > Sq(3) > sage: Sq(3)*Sq(4) > > Sq(7) > sage: quit() > quit())) > Exiting Sage (CPU time 0m0.31s, Wall time 0m47.95s). > > Process Sage finished > > > > On Tuesday, August 11,

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.2.beta8 released

o you do that ? Care to post a diff (possibly in Trac#25363 <https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/253637> ? ​ > option and then using that seems to work. > > On Tuesday, August 11, 2020 at 9:32:20 AM UTC-7, Emmanuel Charpentier > wrote: >> >> John, what is your curre

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.2.beta8 released

't figured out the sage-shell customizations so that it > automatically uses '--simple-prompt' whenever you ask it to start Sage, but > that's a separate problem. > > On Tuesday, August 11, 2020 at 9:44:15 AM UTC-7, Emmanuel Charpentier > wrote: >> >&

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.2.beta9 released

On Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, ugrading 9.2.beta8 + Trac#25363 + Trac#300Trac#3006363 to 9.2.beta9 + Trac#29456 + Trac#30063

Re: [sage-release] Sage 9.2.beta10 released

I second your passing of this issue to "blocker". Le lundi 24 août 2020 à 15:59:14 UTC+2, novo...@gmail.com a écrit : > I am not personally working on getting it ready, but I strongly believe > that no release should happen until > https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/30417 > is resolved - while it

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.2.beta10 released

FWIW, on Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, upgrading from 9.2.beta9 + ptestlong gives me the same permanent failures obtained since 9.2.beta5. HTH, Le lundi 24 août 2020 à 00:15:43 UTC+2, Volker Braun a écrit : > As always, you can get the latest beta version from the "develop" g

[sage-release] Re: Sage 9.2.beta8 released

n't figured out the sage-shell customizations so that it > automatically uses '--simple-prompt' whenever you ask it to start Sage, but > that's a separate problem. > > > On Tuesday, August 11, 2020 at 9:44:15 AM UTC-7, Emmanuel Charpentier > wrote: >>

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >