Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 6.2.beta2 released

On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 11:44:30 strogdon wrote: After looking at ticket 15317 I see that could be a possibility. From the sage shell (sage-sh) strogdon@ledaig:sage$ which hg /usr/bin/hg So, why now? And must I now remove it from my PATH? Experiment for the brave: Delete

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 6.2.beta2 released

patch my Gentoo python with it and python built just fine. I suspect it is somewhere else, unless Gentoo is doing something very, very tricky? On Thursday, February 27, 2014 3:13:28 PM UTC-6, François wrote: On Fri, 28 Feb 2014 10:10:45 François Bissey wrote: On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 11:44:30

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 6.2.beta2 released

: On Fri, 28 Feb 2014 10:10:45 François Bissey wrote: On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 11:44:30 strogdon wrote: After looking at ticket 15317 I see that could be a possibility. From the sage shell (sage-sh) strogdon@ledaig:sage$ which hg /usr/bin/hg

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 6.2.beta2 released

François Bissey wrote: On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 11:44:30 strogdon wrote: After looking at ticket 15317 I see that could be a possibility. From the sage shell (sage-sh) strogdon@ledaig:sage$ which hg /usr/bin/hg

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

On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 12:46:54 kcrisman wrote: On Thursday, March 20, 2014 3:41:27 PM UTC-4, John Cremona wrote: I hope that a Mac expert can help, since I don't use Macs so rely on others to test when I upgrade eclib (which includes mwrank and does indeed depend on Flint). Sorry, John,

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

On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 09:10:40 François Bissey wrote: On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 12:46:54 kcrisman wrote: On Thursday, March 20, 2014 3:41:27 PM UTC-4, John Cremona wrote: I hope that a Mac expert can help, since I don't use Macs so rely on others to test when I upgrade eclib (which includes

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

They are. I just checked on my 10.9.2 machine and I don't have them. That, to me, suggests a variable in the makefile is not defined and -include is taken as a target which doesn't bod well. Francois On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 21:23:41 Bill Hart wrote: These look suspicous:

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

are not defined. We need the configuration to get that. Francois On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 09:26:25 François Bissey wrote: They are. I just checked on my 10.9.2 machine and I don't have them. That, to me, suggests a variable in the makefile is not defined and -include is taken as a target which doesn't

Re: [sage-release] Sage 6.2.beta5 released

On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 23:04:56 leif wrote: François Bissey wrote: The NEWS file for make 3.81 doesn't have anything that I can really relate to the problem. However it would be nice to check if upgrading make on your machine solves this particular problem. Or did I miss that someone else

Re: [sage-release] Sage 6.2.beta5 released

On Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:26:06 kcrisman wrote: And for when you come back: Do you have either local/include/ft2build.h or local/include/freetype2/ft2build.h present. Indeed, the latter is present, but not the former. Any ideas? Would you happen to have another version of freetype2

Re: [sage-release] Sage 6.2.beta5 released

On Tue, 01 Apr 2014 22:50:43 leif wrote: kcrisman wrote: In the meantime, yet another build error - this time rpy. What the heck? Same as with eclib and FLINT... After all, $ ls local/lib/R/lib/ libR.dylib libRblas.dylib libRlapack.dylib $ otool -L

Re: [sage-release] Sage 6.4.beta4 released

On Sun, 28 Sep 2014 09:53:42 William A Stein wrote: On Ubuntu 14.04 LTS Opteron, (a SageMathCloud node), I get numerical noise failures, as alluded to above: sage -t --long --warn-long 57.7 src/sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_element.pyx # 2 doctests failed sage -t --long --warn-long 57.7

Re: [sage-release] Sage 6.4.beta4 released

Anyone else see doctest failure of the kind: sage -t --long /usr/share/sage/src/sage/symbolic/expression.pyx ** File /usr/share/sage/src/sage/symbolic/expression.pyx, line 9349, in sage.symbolic.expression.Expression.solve Failed

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 6.4.beta5 released

On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 15:14:47 Anne Schilling wrote: Hi Volker, Thanks! I get the following problem though on MacOS 10.6.8 ... [repl ] reading sources... [ 69%] sage/repl/display/util [repl ] reading sources... [ 76%] sage/repl/interpreter [dynamics ] reading sources... [ 70%]

Re: [sage-release] Sage 6.4.beta5 released

Volker are you pushing to develop already? Reverting the valgring update? Francois -- 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, send an email to

Re: [sage-release] Sage 6.4.rc0 released

It could. But in this case looking at the 1e-15 tolerance I think that we are just hitting numerical noise because the specification for double doesn't insure that those last decimals are exact. And even if it was for a single computation we could be hit by rounding error if there is a number of

Re: [sage-release] Sage 6.4.rc1 released

I have these rather unpleasant failure: sage -t --long --warn-long 76.2 src/sage/tests/cmdline.py ** File src/sage/tests/cmdline.py, line 222, in sage.tests.cmdline.test_executable Failed example: print out Expected: 34

Re: [sage-release] Sage 6.4.rc1 released

Well, I am taking suggestions on how to debug it because so far I haven't had much success. I am probably thinking too hard about it. Francois On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 02:36:53 Volker Braun wrote: Haven't seen that one before, should be easy to debug though. On Wednesday, November 5, 2014

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 6.5.beta1 released

You need to rebuild maxima. Been there done that with sage-on-gentoo, it is one of commits that were included in 6.4.1. Francois On Thu, 27 Nov 2014 17:58:56 Vincent Delecroix wrote: On the very same file, I get another strange one: $ sage -t --long generic_graph.py too few successful

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 6.4.1 released

On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 12:29:03 kcrisman wrote: On Thursday, December 4, 2014 3:26:09 PM UTC-5, kcrisman wrote: Incidentally, though I don't think I'd want to do this long-term, I think I might be interested in pulling off one final set of binaries for PPC for Sage 6.4.1 if

Re: [sage-release] Sage 6.6.beta6 released

On 03/20/15 13:49, leif wrote: On 03/20/2015 12:45 AM, François Bissey wrote: Not usually asking for help for sage-on-gentoo problem but I must say this one stumping me... Documentation fails to build with: Error building the documentation. Traceback (most recent call last): File doc/common

Re: [sage-release] Sage 6.6.beta6 released

On 03/20/15 14:07, François Bissey wrote: On 03/20/15 13:49, leif wrote: On 03/20/2015 12:45 AM, François Bissey wrote: Not usually asking for help for sage-on-gentoo problem but I must say this one stumping me... Documentation fails to build with: Error building the documentation. Traceback

Re: [sage-release] Sage 6.6.beta6 released

On 03/20/15 14:17, François Bissey wrote: On 03/20/15 14:07, François Bissey wrote: On 03/20/15 13:49, leif wrote: On 03/20/2015 12:45 AM, François Bissey wrote: Not usually asking for help for sage-on-gentoo problem but I must say this one stumping me... Documentation fails to build

Re: [sage-release] Sage 6.8.rc1 released

libgap-4.7.8 ntl-9.3.0.p0 python2-2.7.9 I am not sure why it stops but restarting again with the same make command (MAKE=make -j20 make) goes to completion without problems. Francois On 07/23/15 11:39, François Bissey wrote: I could do another build with native gcc

Re: [sage-release] Sage 6.8.rc1 released

I could do another build with native gcc to check again but I still have these after forcing sage's gcc: sage -t --long --warn-long 97.3 src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 2 doctests failed sage -t --long --warn-long 97.3 src/sage/lfunctions/sympow.py # 4 doctests failed

Re: [sage-release] 7.3.beta2: Compilation failed with Brial

While some of that stuff is not completely surprising, some is. I have compiled a number of those with gcc-5.3 and -std=c++11 for various reasons. Could you provide log for eclib, ppl (ok that one is new) and singular. Also possibly ntl as things happening there will affect eclib and singular

Re: [sage-release] Sage 7.0 released

On 05/26/16 09:58, Justin C. Walker wrote: One more thing: On May 25, 2016, at 14:39 , Justin C. Walker wrote: On May 25, 2016, at 13:58 , François Bissey wrote: [snip] It is technically a race condition. Those are fiddly to predict. Yep. Six is a requirement for several packages, which

Re: [sage-release] Sage 7.0 released

On 05/26/16 04:16, Justin C. Walker wrote: On May 25, 2016, at 00:43, Francois Bissey wrote: Looks like “six” needs to be a build dependency of pathlib2. Installed /Users/Sage/sage-7.2/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pathlib2-2.1.0-py2.7.egg Processing

Re: [sage-release] 7.3.beta2: Compilation failed with Brial

On 06/02/16 09:29, François Bissey wrote: On 06/02/16 03:23, arojas wrote: This seems to be the problem: checking unordered_map usability... no checking unordered_map presence... yes configure: WARNING: unordered_map: present but cannot be compiled configure: WARNING: unordered_map

Re: [sage-release] Sage 7.1.beta5 released

I am not seeing it yet on github, have you prepared it from your fork? Francois On 02/26/16 10:14, Volker Braun wrote: As always, you can get the latest beta version from the "develop" git branch. Alternatively, the self-contained source tarball is at

Re: [sage-release] Sage 7.2.beta6 released

On 04/29/16 10:53, Volker Braun wrote: 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 c04fdff Updated SageMath version to 7.2.beta6 46bf5cf Trac #17048: Faster

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 7.6.beta1 released

On 31/01/17 10:37, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: Thanks for the hint. Patch merged, seems to compile. That should have been merger in the beta... I'll keep you posted about results (might take a while, since I distcleaned...). Sorry I filled the issue after the beta. I was going on holidays when

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 7.6.beta1 released

Known bug. You hit https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/22260 On 31/01/17 10:15, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: On Debian testing, FAILS TO BUILD early (the failure is on MPIR). Logs attached. Any hint welcome... -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le jeudi 26 janvier 2017 00:54:09 UTC+1, Volker Braun a écrit

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 7.4.beta0 released

On 18/08/16 02:36, leif wrote: Jean-Pierre Flori wrote: On a POWER7 machine I get an error while building the docs I get a ZeroDivisionError in the plotting section. Did anybody experience it? Do we have a ticket for that? sudo revive skynet The only one I'm aware of (perhaps just

Re: [sage-release] Sage 7.5.beta1 released

On 07/11/16 02:21, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: Could we try the "Great White Shark" methof (i. e. bite and see what happens) ? You could try compiling flint/arb with this patch with your gcc 5.4.x you say you have installed and report back the ravages... Can do that. I'll just grab pop corn

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 7.5.beta1 released

Debian had a lot of failures in their *7.4* build from matrix_integer_dense too. I cannot guarantee that was the exact same one. But https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21749 fixed their problems. Francois On 07/11/16 11:38, John H Palmieri wrote: On OS X 10.12, I get an intermittent failure with

Re: [sage-release] Sage 7.5.beta1 released

On 07/11/16 10:40, François Bissey wrote: On 07/11/16 02:21, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: Could we try the "Great White Shark" methof (i. e. bite and see what happens) ? You could try compiling flint/arb with this patch with your gcc 5.4.x you say you have installed and report back t

Re: [sage-release] Sage 7.5.beta1 released

On 07/11/16 11:37, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: Singular des not build (see enclosed (parallel) install and pkg logs). Nothing that further clean up in spkg-install wouldn't fix but it shouldn't happen from a distclean state since the offending file should have been removed: /usr/bin/install:

Re: [sage-release] OSX 10.12 openssl and other problems

On 23/11/16 11:24, Dima Pasechnik wrote: 1) In the Xcode for OSX 10.12, there is no more openssl. It used to be in some obscure directory, see build/pkgs/python2/spkg-install, the line cp -rp

Re: [sage-release] Sage 7.5.beta5 released

On 02/12/16 14:47, Paul Masson wrote: I see many instances of SAGE_SRC in the source code but not so many of SAGE_LIB. I'm also not finding any documentation for SAGE_LIB. How are people supposed to know what is considered the proper use of the two locations? How many of the package that you

Re: [sage-release] Sage 7.5.beta5 released

I am testing a patch. Basically you really want the html file to be installed like the other python files. Then you can use SAGE_LIB which really is the top level of "site-packages" instead of SAGE_SRC. This is what I am testing right now diff --git a/src/sage/plot/plot3d/base.pyx

Re: [sage-release] Sage 7.5.beta5 released

Re-reading your answer again, if you don't want it along side the .py files you'll have to install it in something like local/share/sage. You could put it in its own folder under src/ext/ and it would installed automatically by the current mechanic. But you would have to change SAGE_SRC to

Re: [sage-release] Sage 7.5.beta5 released

Can please people stop using files in SAGE_SRC at runtime and people stop reviewing such things positively unless there is absolutely no choices. In sage/plot/plot3d/base.pyx we have line 410 and after: from sage.env import SAGE_SRC filename = os.path.join(SAGE_SRC, 'sage',

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.0.beta1 released

OK in your config.log I see the following: /home/adam/Downloads/sage-8.0.beta1/local/var/lib/sage/installed/python2-2.7.13.p0: Permission denied In any case, I should have spotted it earlier, that's not where python is supposed to be. It looks like someone set

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.0.beta3 released

On 24/04/17 12:18, tsc...@ucdavis.edu wrote: Does this help? | ld -v GNU ld (GNU BinutilsforUbuntu)2.26.1 | Let me know what else I can get or do to help debug this. I am not sure how to find the incriminating info. But we should support your configuration, so lcalc will have to be fixed.

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.0.rc0 released

HA! No it is not. You could do a search on sage-devel where it has been raised before. In short libgd found libvpx and build itself with support for vpx. Then libvpx has been upgraded in your distro…

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.0.rc1 released

see: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/sage-devel/iftex%7Csort:relevance/sage-devel/_o5OX8uhpWM/Vgf21SRIBgAJ install texlive-generic-extra François > On 7/07/2017, at 00:26, Eric Gourgoulhon wrote: > > On Ubuntu 16.04 with the default texlive install, the pdf

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.0 released (desire binary for OSX 10.11.6)

Quite similar to https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-core/issues/4809 which suggests you do not have Xcode 8 Command Line Tools (CLT for short) installed. Do you have Xcode 8 and did you install the CLT? François > On 8/08/2017, at 04:45, Bruce wrote: > > > On Sunday,

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.0 released

We currently build everything with MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET=10.9 Which is actually not OS X 10.9. The counting scheme used make OS X 10.12 have MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET=10.16. So that’s a number of OS X release back. The only way to know if it really works is to try it. We will probably want to

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.0.beta12 released

> On 23/06/2017, at 08:11, Volker Braun wrote: > > 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 > > This might be the last beta for

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.0.beta10 released

On 12/06/17 16:04, tsc...@ucdavis.edu wrote: > t seems that this happens on several machines: > > Error installing package gf2x-1.1.p2 > > See for example > >

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.0.beta10 released

On 12/06/17 16:20, tsc...@ucdavis.edu wrote: Given what I see, you only get this when you set SAGE_TUNE_GF2X=full. Unsetting SAGE_TUNE_GF2X (which is the default) or putting it to no will work. At least it looks to me like SAGE_TUNE_GF2X is set to full from the log, let me know

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.1.beta8 released

> On 19/10/2017, at 03:57, Erik Bray wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Volker Braun > wrote: >> As always, you can get the latest beta version from the "develop" git >> branch. Alternatively, the

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.1.beta8 released

> On 19/10/2017, at 08:54, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > > Could this be > https://github.com/cython/cython/issues/1375 I am not sure, that ticket talk about truncation, we seem to suffer from some limited form of recursive appending. And I can confirm if I run the doctest

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.1.beta9 released

> On 24/10/2017, at 18:41, Justin C. Walker <jus...@mac.com> wrote: > >> >> On Oct 23, 2017, at 13:54 , François Bissey <frp.bis...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 24/10/2017, at 09:22, François Bissey <frp.bis...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On 24

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.2.beta0 released

Can we have an updated develop branch on github? François > On 14/12/2017, at 12:03, Volker Braun wrote: > > As always, you can get the latest beta version from the "develop" git branch. > Alternatively, the self-contained source tarball is at >

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.2.beta0 released

t;dimp...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, December 13, 2017 at 11:28:29 PM UTC, François Bissey wrote: > Can we have an updated develop branch on github? > > in case, you can pull from here: https://github.com/dimpase/sagetrac-mirror > > > François >

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.1.rc1 released

And it is already a dependency. A build order one, so doc is not rebuilt when script changes. Do you need the doc rebuilt on script changes? Or considering the conversation before you meant sympy? François > On 19/11/2017, at 08:30, François Bissey <frp.bis...@gmail.com> wrote: >

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.1.rc1 released

scipy -> script according to my autocorrect. > On 19/11/2017, at 08:32, François Bissey <frp.bis...@gmail.com> wrote: > > And it is already a dependency. A build order one, so doc is not > rebuilt when script changes. Do you need the doc rebuilt on script changes

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.1.rc0 released

Define strange behaviours? > On 16/11/2017, at 18:52, Kwankyu Lee wrote: > > Hi, > > Does this release support Xcode 9.1 on mac? > > I built this release with Xcode 9.1, and the Sage built shows strange > behaviors. Is this because of Xcode 9.1? -- You received this

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.1.rc0 released

Smells like https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/23742 > On 10/11/2017, at 11:31, John H Palmieri wrote: > > WIth OS X 10.12.6, Xcode (and the same happens when building with clang, > #12426): > > sage -t --long --warn-long 64.0 src/sage/matrix/matrix_mod2_dense.pyx # >

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.3.beta0 released

> wrote: > > Isn't Trac#25323 good enough ? > > -- > Emmanuel Charpentier > > Le jeudi 10 mai 2018 10:22:06 UTC+2, François Bissey a écrit : > It is probably an oversight or a corner case in > https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/20382 > Do open a ticket for that.

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.3.beta0 released

It is probably an oversight or a corner case in https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/20382 Do open a ticket for that. François > On 10/05/2018, at 20:15, Emmanuel Charpentier > wrote: > > On Debian testing running on cote i7 + 16 GB RAM, make ptestlong gives me >

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.3.beta2 released

If the optional package bliss is installed the following doctests fail: sage -t --long --warn-long 83.4 src/sage/geometry/polyhedron/base.py # 4 doctests failed sage -t --long --warn-long 83.4 src/sage/geometry/lattice_polytope.py # 1 doctest failed sage -t --long --warn-long 83.4

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.2.beta2 released

It’s picking up an installation of webs in /usr/local gcc -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -Wno-unused -DHAVE_WEBPMUX -I/opt/s/sage-8.2.beta2/local/include/freetype2 -I/opt/s/sage-8.2.beta2/local/var/tmp/sage/build/pillow-3.3.0/src/libImaging

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.2.beta2 released

'/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/sbin:/Library/TeX/texbin' > > so I'm surprised anything from /usr/local gets picked up. > > Samuel > > 2018-01-09 12:47 GMT-06:00 François Bissey <frp.bis...@gmail.com>: > It’s picking up an installation of webs in /usr/local > gcc -fno-str

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.2.beta4 released

c-1.4.9.45] > /home/embray/src/sagemath/sage/local/var/tmp/sage/build/giac-1.4.9.45/src/src/.libs/libgiac.so: > undefined reference to `png_set_longjmp_fn' > [giac-1.4.9.45] collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status > > > So this has rendered this beta unbuildable for me. &

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.2.beta4 released

> > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 8:09 AM François Bissey <frp.bis...@gmail.com> wrote: > I was going to warn sage-on-gentoo users on this interesting fact that I > experienced > on the experimental branch where I track stuff that Volker merges. > It is probably an issue in giac,

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.2.beta4 released

I was going to warn sage-on-gentoo users on this interesting fact that I experienced on the experimental branch where I track stuff that Volker merges. It is probably an issue in giac, but at the end of the day gcc needs to be rebuilt after mpfr/mpc. I didn’t think about the problem of what

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.2.beta4 released

Interesting question and I don’t know. I only know that the failure comes from mpfr_assert_fail in mpfr-3 code as indicated by your log. What else, there was a change of soname which means that there are incompatibilities between mpfr-3 and mpfr-4 and that is probably at play here. None of the

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.2.beta5 released

> On 9/02/2018, at 23:03, Ralf Stephan wrote: > > So how to use clang on Linux? CC=clang CXX=clang++ make Adjust to the peculiarity of your install in terms of PATH and compiler names. François -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

Which version of ubuntu? We have seen an instance of that problem during review but we thought it was fixed. OK, there was something nagging me but it looked fixed on the patchbot. > On 9/02/2018, at 23:56, fchapot...@gmail.com wrote: > > An incremental build from previous beta fails on

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

OK, that’s a slightly different issue. I didn’t think that would be a problem but this package shouldn’t be needed with python3.2+ since it is a backport of functionality for older python. So it would be best not to install it with python3. > On 10/02/2018, at 05:55, fchapot...@gmail.com wrote:

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.2.beta5 released

Can you test the branch at https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/24721 and see if that helps with this particular machine. François > On 10/02/2018, at 19:40, Justin C. Walker <jus...@mac.com> wrote: > > >> On Feb 9, 2018, at 19:32 , François Bissey <frp.bis...@gmail.com&

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

ault-when-using-clang > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 9:16 AM François Bissey <frp.bis...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 12/02/2018, at 20:06, Ralf Stephan <gtrw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Finally here is the recommended set of flags for clang on Linux: >

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.2.beta5 released

> On 13/02/2018, at 12:42, Justin C. Walker <jus...@mac.com> wrote: > > >> On Feb 12, 2018, at 14:45, François Bissey <frp.bis...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Can you test the branch at https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/24721 >> and see if that helps wit

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

> On 11/02/2018, at 10:36, Simon King wrote: > >> >> Ubuntu is probably the most used distro if someone can wipe up some >> instructions >> on what to install that would help greatly. > > Well, so far I was installing clang, clang-dev and libc++abi-dev. The > latter

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

I am sorry to have cause everyone who wanted to try it on linux so much grief. To summarise * you need to build from scratch * clang using libstdc++ from gcc appears to have problems - at the moment I don’t know if it is just because the gcc in question is too old or that’s a no go. * if you

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.2.beta5 released

> On 10/02/2018, at 12:07, Justin C. Walker wrote: > >> >> On Feb 9, 2018, at 00:25 , Volker Braun wrote: >> >> As always, you can get the latest beta version from the "develop" git >> branch. Alternatively, the self-contained source tarball is at >>

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.2.beta5 released

> On 11/02/2018, at 19:57, François Bissey <frp.bis...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On 10/02/2018, at 12:07, Justin C. Walker <jus...@mac.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Feb 9, 2018, at 00:25 , Volker Braun <vbraun.n...@gmail.com> wrote:

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.2.beta5 released

We didn’t test clang 3.7 which is what your machine is using at OS X 10.11. But I recognised the error as one I got in the same place when I tried a build with icc on linux. Yes that’s a fun bit I haven’t mentioned yet. You can technically try any compiler that pretends to be gcc - but only clang

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

> On 12/02/2018, at 20:06, Ralf Stephan wrote: > > Finally here is the recommended set of flags for clang on Linux: > > export CC="clang" > export CXX="clang++" > export CLANG_DEFAULT_CXX_STDLIB="libc++" > Where did you find about this variable? I’d like to know if there

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.2.beta5 released

> On 15/02/2018, at 12:21, Justin C. Walker <jus...@mac.com> wrote: > > >> On Feb 12, 2018, at 14:45 , François Bissey <frp.bis...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Can you test the branch at https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/24721 >> and s

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.2.beta5 released

> On 10/02/2018, at 18:06, kcrisman <kcris...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Friday, February 9, 2018 at 10:32:49 PM UTC-5, François Bissey wrote: > We didn’t test clang 3.7 which is what your machine is using at OS X 10.11. > > Would that be the same as this one? I also

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

> On 10/02/2018, at 22:02, Simon King <simon.k...@uni-jena.de> wrote: > > On 2018-02-10, François Bissey <frp.bis...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I’d recommend to work on a separate clone. It is what I have done >> on my Gentoo linux box. I don’t know the state of cl

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.2.beta5 released

> On 10/02/2018, at 19:40, Justin C. Walker wrote: > > Thanks for this. I have > > Apple LLVM version 7.0.2 (clang-700.1.81) > Target: x86_64-apple-darwin15.6.0 > Thread model: posix > > Is there a fairly straight-forward way to get Apple’s clang at what you're > calling

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

> On 10/02/2018, at 21:25, Simon King wrote: > > Here are reports that with clang things won't work in different ways > (e.g., IIUC, segfaults in linbox on openSuse). Does that mean clang is > buggy resp. not mature enough, or does that mean clang uncovers real > bugs

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

Actually if you have the autotools packages installed (from the system or sage) can you try autoreconf -i then re-run configure and see if that fix it. > On 10/02/2018, at 00:02, François Bissey <frp.bis...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Which version of ubuntu? We have seen an instance

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.2.beta5 released

Note that from this release a fresh build on OS X will use clang. Building gcc and using it can be triggered with SAGE_INSTALL_GCC=yes as usual. Incremental upgrade will continue to use the previously configured compiler. Feedback on optional packages that are broken by the move appreciated.

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

> On 11/02/2018, at 00:02, Simon King wrote: > >> s is what I did now. It is still in the process of building. > > While it was building, I noticed lines such as > [python_openid-2.2.5.p0] Found candidate GCC installation: > /usr/bin/../lib/gcc/i686-linux-gnu/5.4.0

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta5 released

> On 10/02/2018, at 23:49, Simon King <simon.k...@uni-jena.de> wrote: > > Hi François, > > On 2018-02-10, François Bissey <frp.bis...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I’d recommend to work on a separate clone. It is what I have done >> on my Gentoo linux box. &

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.2.beta6 released

> On 19/02/2018, at 19:36, Justin C. Walker wrote: > >> >> On Feb 18, 2018, at 12:09 , Volker Braun wrote: >> >> As always, you can get the latest beta version from the "develop" git >> branch. Alternatively, the self-contained source tarball is at

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.4.beta4 released

No you didn’t. Volker hasn’t pushed on github yet. I am waiting myself to update the sage-on-gentoo ebuild. François > On 7/09/2018, at 17:12, 'Justin C. Walker' via sage-release > wrote: > > >> On Sep 6, 2018, at 16:24 , Volker Braun wrote: >> >> As always, you can get the latest beta

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.4.beta4 released

For info he did a couple of hours after my answer to you. So it has been available for about 12 hours now. > On 8/09/2018, at 07:17, 'Justin C. Walker' via sage-release > wrote: > > >> On Sep 6, 2018, at 22:24 , François Bissey wrote: >> >> No you didn’t. Volk

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.beta8 released

> On 15/03/2018, at 04:34, Sébastien Labbé wrote: > > On Ubuntu 16.04, my first attempt at running make finishes with a problem > with giac (undefined reference to `png_set_longjmp_fn') > > The log finishes with: > > ... > [giac-1.4.9.45.p2] libtool: link: g++ -g -O2

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.2.rc1 released

Would https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/25026 look helpful? sun.audio missing? > On 1/04/2018, at 22:40, Emmanuel Charpentier > wrote: > > On Debian testing running on Core i7 + 16 GB RAM, builds and passes ptestlong > without errors whatsoever. > > However, I

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.5.beta0 released

I cannot see that. Which file is affected? François > On 26/10/2018, at 09:34, John H Palmieri wrote: > > > > On Thursday, October 25, 2018 at 1:30:30 PM UTC-7, John H Palmieri wrote: > PDF docs fail to build for me: > > [docpdf] LaTeX Warning: Command \LaTeX invalid in math mode on input

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.5.beta0 released

e 2018). > > If I comment out \usepackage{babel} and some lines related to that package, > it builds, so it appears to be a conflict with the babel package. My version > is "2018/10/16 3.26". I've opened https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/26558 for > this. > > John

Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.5 released

Volker, I see you tagged 8.5 in the develop branch on github but the master is not updated. > On 23/12/2018, at 13:19, Volker Braun wrote: > > The "master" git branch has been updated to Sage-8.5. As always, you can get > the latest beta version from the "develop" git branch. Alternatively,

Re: [sage-release] Re: Sage 8.5.beta5 released

This is definitely it. It introduced the doctests in question. I guess I should have provided that extra info. > On 28/11/2018, at 22:11, fchapot...@gmail.com wrote: > > Could be caused by https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/26702 > > Le mercredi 28 novembre 2018 09:49:53 UTC+1,

  1   2   >