Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
On Fri, 11 Oct 2019, 16:04 Thierry, wrote: > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 02:50:41PM -0500, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > I can't post there on ask.* from phone, I believe that installing > > libncurses5-dev and libreadline-dev should allow the build to use system > > readline. > > Unfortunately, what i understand from the post, the user does not have > root acces, hence can not install packages. > asking the sysadmin to install two bog-standard OS packages should not be a problem... > > this is how we made it work on John's machines. > > Naturally, the *.m4 files must not be removed, > > This was just a test to ensure that our version of readline will be > installed. > > Ciao, > Thierry > > > and Sage's ncurses package uninstalled with > > > > make ncurses-clean > > > > then > > > > ./configure > > > > make > > > > On Fri, 11 Oct 2019, 12:14 Thierry, > wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > there is also a readline-related issue on 8.9 there: > > > > > > > https://ask.sagemath.org/question/48276/building-sage-89-from-source-fails/ > > > > > > Ciao, > > > Thierry > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 01:46:00PM -0500, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 11:27 AM John Cremona > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 09:07, John Cremona > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 02:22, Dima Pasechnik > > > wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > >>> something did not work as you installed libncurses5-dev, > > > > >>> as you still appear to miss > > > > >>> /usr/include/ncurses.h > > > > >>> (according to the new log: > > > > >>> configure:10315: checking for ncurses.h > > > > >>> configure:10315: result: no ) > > > > >>> > > > > >>> whereas > > > https://packages.ubuntu.com/xenial/amd64/libncurses5-dev/filelist > > > > >>> has this file listed... > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Could you check that > > > > >>> /usr/include/ncurses.h > > > > >>> is present on the box? > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> It was not, but I think that yesterday I was confused and had > > > installed it on a different machine from the one I reported on (too > many > > > windows open). I just checked by manually installing that package on > all 6 > > > machines, which did do the install in 5 cases while on the 6th it was > > > already there -- and that 6th machine was one for which the original > build > > > had worked OK! (Yesterday I said that all 6 had failed the same way > but in > > > fact 5 had, the 6th was still building when I reported). > > > > >> > > > > >> For completeness I am attaching he latest config.log. > > > > >> > > > > >> I think that Samuel might have hit on something I did wrong. My > bash > > > history shows > > > > >> > > > > >> 1989 tar zxf 8.9.tar.gz > > > > >> 1990 cd sage-8.9 > > > > >> 1991 make configure > > > > >> 1992 make > > > > >> > > > > >> with no ./configure step. I must have thought that "make > configure" > > > was instead of that... > > > > >> > > > > >> I'll restart the 5 builds after doing ./configure (after > > > ncurses-clean and readline-clean), and report back. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All went successfully. My only remaining question is: is I had > done > > > ./configure aafter make configure and before make, would the build have > > > worked (without inctalling those ubuntu packages which had somehow > never > > > been needed for previous builds)? > > > > > > > > > "make configure" is only needed if Sage's main configure script is > > > updated. > > > > Just look at the target "configure" in the main Makefile > > > > > > > > I guess there could be a bug introduced in commit > > > > 584735d9abe44b079df2566f7f73b6a69aaea0cf > > > > as I mentioned above in the thread. > > > > Feel free to open a ticket, saying that Sage's 8.9 readline builds > > > > underlinked on ubuntu xenial > > > > > > > > > John > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:20 AM John Cremona < > john.crem...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 18:20, Dima Pasechnik > > > > wrote: > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Hi John, > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Do you have > > > > >>> >> libncurses5-dev > > > > >>> >> installed? > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > No only the package without -dev. > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> I guess not, as in your config.log I see > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> conftest.cpp:56:21: fatal error: ncurses.h: No such file or > > > directory > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> and this header is provided by this package. > > > > >>> >> I'd say it's a bug in Ubunty xenial that libreadline-dev does > not > > > > >>> >> depend on this package! > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Could you try installing it, then run > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> make ncurses-clean > > > > >>> >> make readline-clean > > > > >>> >> ./configure > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > I did that. > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> >> > > > >
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 02:50:41PM -0500, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > I can't post there on ask.* from phone, I believe that installing > libncurses5-dev and libreadline-dev should allow the build to use system > readline. Unfortunately, what i understand from the post, the user does not have root acces, hence can not install packages. > this is how we made it work on John's machines. > Naturally, the *.m4 files must not be removed, This was just a test to ensure that our version of readline will be installed. Ciao, Thierry > and Sage's ncurses package uninstalled with > > make ncurses-clean > > then > > ./configure > > make > > On Fri, 11 Oct 2019, 12:14 Thierry, wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > there is also a readline-related issue on 8.9 there: > > > > https://ask.sagemath.org/question/48276/building-sage-89-from-source-fails/ > > > > Ciao, > > Thierry > > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 01:46:00PM -0500, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 11:27 AM John Cremona > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 09:07, John Cremona > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 02:22, Dima Pasechnik > > wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> something did not work as you installed libncurses5-dev, > > > >>> as you still appear to miss > > > >>> /usr/include/ncurses.h > > > >>> (according to the new log: > > > >>> configure:10315: checking for ncurses.h > > > >>> configure:10315: result: no ) > > > >>> > > > >>> whereas > > https://packages.ubuntu.com/xenial/amd64/libncurses5-dev/filelist > > > >>> has this file listed... > > > >>> > > > >>> Could you check that > > > >>> /usr/include/ncurses.h > > > >>> is present on the box? > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> It was not, but I think that yesterday I was confused and had > > installed it on a different machine from the one I reported on (too many > > windows open). I just checked by manually installing that package on all 6 > > machines, which did do the install in 5 cases while on the 6th it was > > already there -- and that 6th machine was one for which the original build > > had worked OK! (Yesterday I said that all 6 had failed the same way but in > > fact 5 had, the 6th was still building when I reported). > > > >> > > > >> For completeness I am attaching he latest config.log. > > > >> > > > >> I think that Samuel might have hit on something I did wrong. My bash > > history shows > > > >> > > > >> 1989 tar zxf 8.9.tar.gz > > > >> 1990 cd sage-8.9 > > > >> 1991 make configure > > > >> 1992 make > > > >> > > > >> with no ./configure step. I must have thought that "make configure" > > was instead of that... > > > >> > > > >> I'll restart the 5 builds after doing ./configure (after > > ncurses-clean and readline-clean), and report back. > > > > > > > > > > > > All went successfully. My only remaining question is: is I had done > > ./configure aafter make configure and before make, would the build have > > worked (without inctalling those ubuntu packages which had somehow never > > been needed for previous builds)? > > > > > > > "make configure" is only needed if Sage's main configure script is > > updated. > > > Just look at the target "configure" in the main Makefile > > > > > > I guess there could be a bug introduced in commit > > > 584735d9abe44b079df2566f7f73b6a69aaea0cf > > > as I mentioned above in the thread. > > > Feel free to open a ticket, saying that Sage's 8.9 readline builds > > > underlinked on ubuntu xenial > > > > > > > John > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:20 AM John Cremona > > wrote: > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 18:20, Dima Pasechnik > > wrote: > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> Hi John, > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> Do you have > > > >>> >> libncurses5-dev > > > >>> >> installed? > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > No only the package without -dev. > > > >>> > > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> I guess not, as in your config.log I see > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> conftest.cpp:56:21: fatal error: ncurses.h: No such file or > > directory > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> and this header is provided by this package. > > > >>> >> I'd say it's a bug in Ubunty xenial that libreadline-dev does not > > > >>> >> depend on this package! > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> Could you try installing it, then run > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> make ncurses-clean > > > >>> >> make readline-clean > > > >>> >> ./configure > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > I did that. > > > >>> > > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> and check whether system-wide readline is picked up? > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > Now config.log includes these lines > > > >>> > > > > >>> > configure:13881: === checking whether to install the readline SPKG > > === > > > >>> > configure:13925: checking Installing ncurses? > > > >>> > configure:13928: result: Yes. Install readline as well. > > > >>> > configure:14176: === checking whether to install the pari SPKG === > > > >>> > configure:14222: ch
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
I can't post there on ask.* from phone, I believe that installing libncurses5-dev and libreadline-dev should allow the build to use system readline. this is how we made it work on John's machines. Naturally, the *.m4 files must not be removed, and Sage's ncurses package uninstalled with make ncurses-clean then ./configure make On Fri, 11 Oct 2019, 12:14 Thierry, wrote: > Hi, > > there is also a readline-related issue on 8.9 there: > > https://ask.sagemath.org/question/48276/building-sage-89-from-source-fails/ > > Ciao, > Thierry > > > > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 01:46:00PM -0500, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 11:27 AM John Cremona > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 09:07, John Cremona > wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 02:22, Dima Pasechnik > wrote: > > >>> > > >>> something did not work as you installed libncurses5-dev, > > >>> as you still appear to miss > > >>> /usr/include/ncurses.h > > >>> (according to the new log: > > >>> configure:10315: checking for ncurses.h > > >>> configure:10315: result: no ) > > >>> > > >>> whereas > https://packages.ubuntu.com/xenial/amd64/libncurses5-dev/filelist > > >>> has this file listed... > > >>> > > >>> Could you check that > > >>> /usr/include/ncurses.h > > >>> is present on the box? > > >> > > >> > > >> It was not, but I think that yesterday I was confused and had > installed it on a different machine from the one I reported on (too many > windows open). I just checked by manually installing that package on all 6 > machines, which did do the install in 5 cases while on the 6th it was > already there -- and that 6th machine was one for which the original build > had worked OK! (Yesterday I said that all 6 had failed the same way but in > fact 5 had, the 6th was still building when I reported). > > >> > > >> For completeness I am attaching he latest config.log. > > >> > > >> I think that Samuel might have hit on something I did wrong. My bash > history shows > > >> > > >> 1989 tar zxf 8.9.tar.gz > > >> 1990 cd sage-8.9 > > >> 1991 make configure > > >> 1992 make > > >> > > >> with no ./configure step. I must have thought that "make configure" > was instead of that... > > >> > > >> I'll restart the 5 builds after doing ./configure (after > ncurses-clean and readline-clean), and report back. > > > > > > > > > All went successfully. My only remaining question is: is I had done > ./configure aafter make configure and before make, would the build have > worked (without inctalling those ubuntu packages which had somehow never > been needed for previous builds)? > > > > > "make configure" is only needed if Sage's main configure script is > updated. > > Just look at the target "configure" in the main Makefile > > > > I guess there could be a bug introduced in commit > > 584735d9abe44b079df2566f7f73b6a69aaea0cf > > as I mentioned above in the thread. > > Feel free to open a ticket, saying that Sage's 8.9 readline builds > > underlinked on ubuntu xenial > > > > > John > > > > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:20 AM John Cremona > wrote: > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 18:20, Dima Pasechnik > wrote: > > >>> >> > > >>> >> Hi John, > > >>> >> > > >>> >> Do you have > > >>> >> libncurses5-dev > > >>> >> installed? > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > No only the package without -dev. > > >>> > > > >>> >> > > >>> >> I guess not, as in your config.log I see > > >>> >> > > >>> >> conftest.cpp:56:21: fatal error: ncurses.h: No such file or > directory > > >>> >> > > >>> >> and this header is provided by this package. > > >>> >> I'd say it's a bug in Ubunty xenial that libreadline-dev does not > > >>> >> depend on this package! > > >>> >> > > >>> >> Could you try installing it, then run > > >>> >> > > >>> >> make ncurses-clean > > >>> >> make readline-clean > > >>> >> ./configure > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > I did that. > > >>> > > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> and check whether system-wide readline is picked up? > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > Now config.log includes these lines > > >>> > > > >>> > configure:13881: === checking whether to install the readline SPKG > === > > >>> > configure:13925: checking Installing ncurses? > > >>> > configure:13928: result: Yes. Install readline as well. > > >>> > configure:14176: === checking whether to install the pari SPKG === > > >>> > configure:14222: checking installing gmp/mpir or readline? > > >>> > configure:14224: result: yes; install pari as well > > >>> > configure:14565: result: using Sage's pari SPKG > > >>> > configure:14587: === checking whether to install the pari_nftables > SPKG === > > >>> > configure:14631: checking installing pari? > > >>> > configure:14634: result: yes; install pari_nftables as well > > >>> > configure:14675: === checking whether to install the pkgconf SPKG > === > > >>> > configure:14718: checking for pkg-config >= 0.29 > > >>> > configure:14794: result: /usr/bin/pkg-config > > >>> > con
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
On Fri, 11 Oct 2019, 12:36 Thierry, wrote: > Thanks for your answer, please could you cc me if you open a ticket ? > I will - might take a bit of time, as I am travelling from IMA at UMN back to UK today. > > Ciao, > Thierry > > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 12:27:28PM -0500, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > yuck, this is a symptome of underlinking in readline. > > In their infinite wisdom readline's devs refuse to fix this old bug; > > it needs to be linked with libtinfo or other suchlike library, and it > > keeps resufacings in various forms... > > > > I think I've made a patch to sage's readline for this, but it > > sometimes breaks for reasons I need to look at. > > > > As to external readline, I guess our spkg-configure.m4 will lead one > > to a broken build if the system's readline is underlinked, > > cause our setup takes no account of this... > > > > So apparently ubuntu 16.04 has an underlinked readline. > > > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 12:14 PM Thierry > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > there is also a readline-related issue on 8.9 there: > > > > > > > https://ask.sagemath.org/question/48276/building-sage-89-from-source-fails/ > > > > > > Ciao, > > > Thierry > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 01:46:00PM -0500, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 11:27 AM John Cremona > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 09:07, John Cremona > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 02:22, Dima Pasechnik > wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > >>> something did not work as you installed libncurses5-dev, > > > > >>> as you still appear to miss > > > > >>> /usr/include/ncurses.h > > > > >>> (according to the new log: > > > > >>> configure:10315: checking for ncurses.h > > > > >>> configure:10315: result: no ) > > > > >>> > > > > >>> whereas > https://packages.ubuntu.com/xenial/amd64/libncurses5-dev/filelist > > > > >>> has this file listed... > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Could you check that > > > > >>> /usr/include/ncurses.h > > > > >>> is present on the box? > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> It was not, but I think that yesterday I was confused and had > installed it on a different machine from the one I reported on (too many > windows open). I just checked by manually installing that package on all 6 > machines, which did do the install in 5 cases while on the 6th it was > already there -- and that 6th machine was one for which the original build > had worked OK! (Yesterday I said that all 6 had failed the same way but in > fact 5 had, the 6th was still building when I reported). > > > > >> > > > > >> For completeness I am attaching he latest config.log. > > > > >> > > > > >> I think that Samuel might have hit on something I did wrong. My > bash history shows > > > > >> > > > > >> 1989 tar zxf 8.9.tar.gz > > > > >> 1990 cd sage-8.9 > > > > >> 1991 make configure > > > > >> 1992 make > > > > >> > > > > >> with no ./configure step. I must have thought that "make > configure" was instead of that... > > > > >> > > > > >> I'll restart the 5 builds after doing ./configure (after > ncurses-clean and readline-clean), and report back. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All went successfully. My only remaining question is: is I had > done ./configure aafter make configure and before make, would the build > have worked (without inctalling those ubuntu packages which had somehow > never been needed for previous builds)? > > > > > > > > > "make configure" is only needed if Sage's main configure script is > updated. > > > > Just look at the target "configure" in the main Makefile > > > > > > > > I guess there could be a bug introduced in commit > > > > 584735d9abe44b079df2566f7f73b6a69aaea0cf > > > > as I mentioned above in the thread. > > > > Feel free to open a ticket, saying that Sage's 8.9 readline builds > > > > underlinked on ubuntu xenial > > > > > > > > > John > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:20 AM John Cremona < > john.crem...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 18:20, Dima Pasechnik > wrote: > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Hi John, > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Do you have > > > > >>> >> libncurses5-dev > > > > >>> >> installed? > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > No only the package without -dev. > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> I guess not, as in your config.log I see > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> conftest.cpp:56:21: fatal error: ncurses.h: No such file or > directory > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> and this header is provided by this package. > > > > >>> >> I'd say it's a bug in Ubunty xenial that libreadline-dev does > not > > > > >>> >> depend on this package! > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Could you try installing it, then run > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> make ncurses-clean > > > > >>> >> make readline-clean > > > > >>> >> ./configure > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > I did that. > > > > >>> > > >
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
Thanks for your answer, please could you cc me if you open a ticket ? Ciao, Thierry On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 12:27:28PM -0500, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > yuck, this is a symptome of underlinking in readline. > In their infinite wisdom readline's devs refuse to fix this old bug; > it needs to be linked with libtinfo or other suchlike library, and it > keeps resufacings in various forms... > > I think I've made a patch to sage's readline for this, but it > sometimes breaks for reasons I need to look at. > > As to external readline, I guess our spkg-configure.m4 will lead one > to a broken build if the system's readline is underlinked, > cause our setup takes no account of this... > > So apparently ubuntu 16.04 has an underlinked readline. > > > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 12:14 PM Thierry > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > there is also a readline-related issue on 8.9 there: > > > > https://ask.sagemath.org/question/48276/building-sage-89-from-source-fails/ > > > > Ciao, > > Thierry > > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 01:46:00PM -0500, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 11:27 AM John Cremona > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 09:07, John Cremona > > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 02:22, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> something did not work as you installed libncurses5-dev, > > > >>> as you still appear to miss > > > >>> /usr/include/ncurses.h > > > >>> (according to the new log: > > > >>> configure:10315: checking for ncurses.h > > > >>> configure:10315: result: no ) > > > >>> > > > >>> whereas > > > >>> https://packages.ubuntu.com/xenial/amd64/libncurses5-dev/filelist > > > >>> has this file listed... > > > >>> > > > >>> Could you check that > > > >>> /usr/include/ncurses.h > > > >>> is present on the box? > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> It was not, but I think that yesterday I was confused and had > > > >> installed it on a different machine from the one I reported on (too > > > >> many windows open). I just checked by manually installing that > > > >> package on all 6 machines, which did do the install in 5 cases while > > > >> on the 6th it was already there -- and that 6th machine was one for > > > >> which the original build had worked OK! (Yesterday I said that all 6 > > > >> had failed the same way but in fact 5 had, the 6th was still building > > > >> when I reported). > > > >> > > > >> For completeness I am attaching he latest config.log. > > > >> > > > >> I think that Samuel might have hit on something I did wrong. My bash > > > >> history shows > > > >> > > > >> 1989 tar zxf 8.9.tar.gz > > > >> 1990 cd sage-8.9 > > > >> 1991 make configure > > > >> 1992 make > > > >> > > > >> with no ./configure step. I must have thought that "make configure" > > > >> was instead of that... > > > >> > > > >> I'll restart the 5 builds after doing ./configure (after ncurses-clean > > > >> and readline-clean), and report back. > > > > > > > > > > > > All went successfully. My only remaining question is: is I had done > > > > ./configure aafter make configure and before make, would the build have > > > > worked (without inctalling those ubuntu packages which had somehow > > > > never been needed for previous builds)? > > > > > > > "make configure" is only needed if Sage's main configure script is > > > updated. > > > Just look at the target "configure" in the main Makefile > > > > > > I guess there could be a bug introduced in commit > > > 584735d9abe44b079df2566f7f73b6a69aaea0cf > > > as I mentioned above in the thread. > > > Feel free to open a ticket, saying that Sage's 8.9 readline builds > > > underlinked on ubuntu xenial > > > > > > > John > > > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:20 AM John Cremona > > > >>> wrote: > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 18:20, Dima Pasechnik > > > >>> > wrote: > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> Hi John, > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> Do you have > > > >>> >> libncurses5-dev > > > >>> >> installed? > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > No only the package without -dev. > > > >>> > > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> I guess not, as in your config.log I see > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> conftest.cpp:56:21: fatal error: ncurses.h: No such file or > > > >>> >> directory > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> and this header is provided by this package. > > > >>> >> I'd say it's a bug in Ubunty xenial that libreadline-dev does not > > > >>> >> depend on this package! > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> Could you try installing it, then run > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> make ncurses-clean > > > >>> >> make readline-clean > > > >>> >> ./configure > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > I did that. > > > >>> > > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> and check whether system-wide readline is picked up? > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > Now config.log includes these lines > > > >>> > > > > >>> > configure:13881: === checking whether to install the readline SPKG
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
yuck, this is a symptome of underlinking in readline. In their infinite wisdom readline's devs refuse to fix this old bug; it needs to be linked with libtinfo or other suchlike library, and it keeps resufacings in various forms... I think I've made a patch to sage's readline for this, but it sometimes breaks for reasons I need to look at. As to external readline, I guess our spkg-configure.m4 will lead one to a broken build if the system's readline is underlinked, cause our setup takes no account of this... So apparently ubuntu 16.04 has an underlinked readline. On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 12:14 PM Thierry wrote: > > Hi, > > there is also a readline-related issue on 8.9 there: > > https://ask.sagemath.org/question/48276/building-sage-89-from-source-fails/ > > Ciao, > Thierry > > > > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 01:46:00PM -0500, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 11:27 AM John Cremona wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 09:07, John Cremona wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 02:22, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > >>> > > >>> something did not work as you installed libncurses5-dev, > > >>> as you still appear to miss > > >>> /usr/include/ncurses.h > > >>> (according to the new log: > > >>> configure:10315: checking for ncurses.h > > >>> configure:10315: result: no ) > > >>> > > >>> whereas > > >>> https://packages.ubuntu.com/xenial/amd64/libncurses5-dev/filelist > > >>> has this file listed... > > >>> > > >>> Could you check that > > >>> /usr/include/ncurses.h > > >>> is present on the box? > > >> > > >> > > >> It was not, but I think that yesterday I was confused and had installed > > >> it on a different machine from the one I reported on (too many windows > > >> open). I just checked by manually installing that package on all 6 > > >> machines, which did do the install in 5 cases while on the 6th it was > > >> already there -- and that 6th machine was one for which the original > > >> build had worked OK! (Yesterday I said that all 6 had failed the same > > >> way but in fact 5 had, the 6th was still building when I reported). > > >> > > >> For completeness I am attaching he latest config.log. > > >> > > >> I think that Samuel might have hit on something I did wrong. My bash > > >> history shows > > >> > > >> 1989 tar zxf 8.9.tar.gz > > >> 1990 cd sage-8.9 > > >> 1991 make configure > > >> 1992 make > > >> > > >> with no ./configure step. I must have thought that "make configure" was > > >> instead of that... > > >> > > >> I'll restart the 5 builds after doing ./configure (after ncurses-clean > > >> and readline-clean), and report back. > > > > > > > > > All went successfully. My only remaining question is: is I had done > > > ./configure aafter make configure and before make, would the build have > > > worked (without inctalling those ubuntu packages which had somehow never > > > been needed for previous builds)? > > > > > "make configure" is only needed if Sage's main configure script is updated. > > Just look at the target "configure" in the main Makefile > > > > I guess there could be a bug introduced in commit > > 584735d9abe44b079df2566f7f73b6a69aaea0cf > > as I mentioned above in the thread. > > Feel free to open a ticket, saying that Sage's 8.9 readline builds > > underlinked on ubuntu xenial > > > > > John > > > > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:20 AM John Cremona > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 18:20, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > >>> >> > > >>> >> Hi John, > > >>> >> > > >>> >> Do you have > > >>> >> libncurses5-dev > > >>> >> installed? > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > No only the package without -dev. > > >>> > > > >>> >> > > >>> >> I guess not, as in your config.log I see > > >>> >> > > >>> >> conftest.cpp:56:21: fatal error: ncurses.h: No such file or directory > > >>> >> > > >>> >> and this header is provided by this package. > > >>> >> I'd say it's a bug in Ubunty xenial that libreadline-dev does not > > >>> >> depend on this package! > > >>> >> > > >>> >> Could you try installing it, then run > > >>> >> > > >>> >> make ncurses-clean > > >>> >> make readline-clean > > >>> >> ./configure > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > I did that. > > >>> > > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> and check whether system-wide readline is picked up? > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > Now config.log includes these lines > > >>> > > > >>> > configure:13881: === checking whether to install the readline SPKG === > > >>> > configure:13925: checking Installing ncurses? > > >>> > configure:13928: result: Yes. Install readline as well. > > >>> > configure:14176: === checking whether to install the pari SPKG === > > >>> > configure:14222: checking installing gmp/mpir or readline? > > >>> > configure:14224: result: yes; install pari as well > > >>> > configure:14565: result: using Sage's pari SPKG > > >>> > configure:14587: === checking whether to install the pari_nftables > > >>> > SPKG === > > >>>
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
Hi, there is also a readline-related issue on 8.9 there: https://ask.sagemath.org/question/48276/building-sage-89-from-source-fails/ Ciao, Thierry On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 01:46:00PM -0500, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 11:27 AM John Cremona wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 09:07, John Cremona wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 02:22, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > >>> > >>> something did not work as you installed libncurses5-dev, > >>> as you still appear to miss > >>> /usr/include/ncurses.h > >>> (according to the new log: > >>> configure:10315: checking for ncurses.h > >>> configure:10315: result: no ) > >>> > >>> whereas https://packages.ubuntu.com/xenial/amd64/libncurses5-dev/filelist > >>> has this file listed... > >>> > >>> Could you check that > >>> /usr/include/ncurses.h > >>> is present on the box? > >> > >> > >> It was not, but I think that yesterday I was confused and had installed it > >> on a different machine from the one I reported on (too many windows open). > >> I just checked by manually installing that package on all 6 machines, > >> which did do the install in 5 cases while on the 6th it was already there > >> -- and that 6th machine was one for which the original build had worked > >> OK! (Yesterday I said that all 6 had failed the same way but in fact 5 > >> had, the 6th was still building when I reported). > >> > >> For completeness I am attaching he latest config.log. > >> > >> I think that Samuel might have hit on something I did wrong. My bash > >> history shows > >> > >> 1989 tar zxf 8.9.tar.gz > >> 1990 cd sage-8.9 > >> 1991 make configure > >> 1992 make > >> > >> with no ./configure step. I must have thought that "make configure" was > >> instead of that... > >> > >> I'll restart the 5 builds after doing ./configure (after ncurses-clean and > >> readline-clean), and report back. > > > > > > All went successfully. My only remaining question is: is I had done > > ./configure aafter make configure and before make, would the build have > > worked (without inctalling those ubuntu packages which had somehow never > > been needed for previous builds)? > > > "make configure" is only needed if Sage's main configure script is updated. > Just look at the target "configure" in the main Makefile > > I guess there could be a bug introduced in commit > 584735d9abe44b079df2566f7f73b6a69aaea0cf > as I mentioned above in the thread. > Feel free to open a ticket, saying that Sage's 8.9 readline builds > underlinked on ubuntu xenial > > > John > > > >>> > >>> > >>> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:20 AM John Cremona > >>> wrote: > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 18:20, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > >>> >> > >>> >> Hi John, > >>> >> > >>> >> Do you have > >>> >> libncurses5-dev > >>> >> installed? > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > No only the package without -dev. > >>> > > >>> >> > >>> >> I guess not, as in your config.log I see > >>> >> > >>> >> conftest.cpp:56:21: fatal error: ncurses.h: No such file or directory > >>> >> > >>> >> and this header is provided by this package. > >>> >> I'd say it's a bug in Ubunty xenial that libreadline-dev does not > >>> >> depend on this package! > >>> >> > >>> >> Could you try installing it, then run > >>> >> > >>> >> make ncurses-clean > >>> >> make readline-clean > >>> >> ./configure > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > I did that. > >>> > > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> and check whether system-wide readline is picked up? > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > Now config.log includes these lines > >>> > > >>> > configure:13881: === checking whether to install the readline SPKG === > >>> > configure:13925: checking Installing ncurses? > >>> > configure:13928: result: Yes. Install readline as well. > >>> > configure:14176: === checking whether to install the pari SPKG === > >>> > configure:14222: checking installing gmp/mpir or readline? > >>> > configure:14224: result: yes; install pari as well > >>> > configure:14565: result: using Sage's pari SPKG > >>> > configure:14587: === checking whether to install the pari_nftables SPKG > >>> > === > >>> > configure:14631: checking installing pari? > >>> > configure:14634: result: yes; install pari_nftables as well > >>> > configure:14675: === checking whether to install the pkgconf SPKG === > >>> > configure:14718: checking for pkg-config >= 0.29 > >>> > configure:14794: result: /usr/bin/pkg-config > >>> > configure:14807: result: using pkg-config from the system > >>> > configure:14841: === checking whether to install the eclib SPKG === > >>> > configure:14886: checking installing ntl or pari? > >>> > configure:14889: result: yes; install eclib as well > >>> > configure:14974: === checking whether to install the > >>> > perl_term_readline_gnu SPKG === > >>> > configure:15066: checking for perl module Term::ReadLine > >>> > configure:15076: result: ok > >>> > configure:15084: checking Term::ReadLine module... > >>> > configure:15088: result: non-GNU > >>> > > >>> > which doe
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 6:00 PM E. Madison Bray wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 5:57 PM E. Madison Bray wrote: > > > > When building from scratch on Cygwin I am getting some errors related > > to OMP-related symbols being missing when linking a Sage module that > > uses fflas-ffpack; specifically sage.libs.linbox_flint_interface: > > > > [sagelib-8.9] g++ -shared -Wl,--enable-auto-image-base > > -L/opt/sagemath-8.9/local/lib -Wl,-rpath,/opt/sagemath-8.9/local/lib > > -L/opt/sagemath-8.9/local/lib -Wl,-rpath,/opt/sagemath-8.9/local/lib > > build/temp.cygwin-3.0.7-x86_64-2.7/build/cythonized/sage/libs/linbox/linbox_flint_interface.o > > -L/opt/sagemath-8.9/local/lib > > -L/opt/sagemath-8.9/local/lib/python2.7/config > > -L/opt/sagemath-8.9/local/lib -llinbox -lntl -liml -lfflas -lffpack > > -lgivaro -lblas -lflint -lmpfr -lgmp -lgmpxx -lstdc++ -lpython2.7 -o > > build/lib.cygwin-3.0.7-x86_64-2.7/sage/libs/linbox/linbox_flint_interface.dll > > [sagelib-8.9] > > build/temp.cygwin-3.0.7-x86_64-2.7/build/cythonized/sage/libs/linbox/linbox_flint_interface.o: > > In function `FFPACK::rns_double::init(unsigned long, unsigned long, > > double*, unsigned long, Givaro::Integer const*, unsigned long, > > unsigned long, bool) const [clone ._omp_fn.0]': > > [sagelib-8.9] > > /opt/sagemath-8.9/local/include/fflas-ffpack/field/rns-double.inl:95: > > undefined reference to `GOMP_loop_ull_runtime_start' > > > > it goes on like that for several related errors. I've never seen this > > one before. This is with gcc 7.4.0. > > > > This was doing a build from scratch for a release, in a clean Cygwin > > install, so I'm not sure where the difference is. One thing I can > > see, comparing to a previous build log of my development sage from one > > of the 8.9 release candidates (with fflas-ffpack 2.4.3) that that > > module was compiled *without* -fopenmp, whereas on my clean build it > > is passing -fopenmp and I'm not sure where the difference is coming > > from. > > Ahah, I can also see that in my development build, configuring > fflas-ffpack output: > > checking for OpenMP... no > > whereas on my release build it has > > checking for OpenMP... yes > > > For now I don't need or care about OpenMP support, as I have not > tested that at all on Windows. I just need to figure out why that > flag is being forcibly set... It appears we used to configure fflas-ffpack with --disable-openmp, however this ticket removed that: https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/27444 without bumping the package patch level. It also didn't remove the comment about disabling OpenMP support, even though it no longer disables it. I'm not sure it make sense to make that the default; perhaps there should be a global config flag for whether or not Sage and its dependencies should be built with OpenMP support. > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 1:19 AM Volker Braun wrote: > > > > > > The "master" git branch has been updated to Sage-8.9. 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 > > > > > > There was no change over 8.9.rc1 > > > > > > -- > > > 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 sage-release+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > > > To view this discussion on the web visit > > > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/ea48d604-eff9-4b8c-ab44-a0929a7e99f9%40googlegroups.com. -- 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 sage-release+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/CAOTD34aDCyYgi6Q6aD1BixY0g-cf1G_1J8sZcbu58YmwcuHsYw%40mail.gmail.com.
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 5:57 PM E. Madison Bray wrote: > > When building from scratch on Cygwin I am getting some errors related > to OMP-related symbols being missing when linking a Sage module that > uses fflas-ffpack; specifically sage.libs.linbox_flint_interface: > > [sagelib-8.9] g++ -shared -Wl,--enable-auto-image-base > -L/opt/sagemath-8.9/local/lib -Wl,-rpath,/opt/sagemath-8.9/local/lib > -L/opt/sagemath-8.9/local/lib -Wl,-rpath,/opt/sagemath-8.9/local/lib > build/temp.cygwin-3.0.7-x86_64-2.7/build/cythonized/sage/libs/linbox/linbox_flint_interface.o > -L/opt/sagemath-8.9/local/lib > -L/opt/sagemath-8.9/local/lib/python2.7/config > -L/opt/sagemath-8.9/local/lib -llinbox -lntl -liml -lfflas -lffpack > -lgivaro -lblas -lflint -lmpfr -lgmp -lgmpxx -lstdc++ -lpython2.7 -o > build/lib.cygwin-3.0.7-x86_64-2.7/sage/libs/linbox/linbox_flint_interface.dll > [sagelib-8.9] > build/temp.cygwin-3.0.7-x86_64-2.7/build/cythonized/sage/libs/linbox/linbox_flint_interface.o: > In function `FFPACK::rns_double::init(unsigned long, unsigned long, > double*, unsigned long, Givaro::Integer const*, unsigned long, > unsigned long, bool) const [clone ._omp_fn.0]': > [sagelib-8.9] > /opt/sagemath-8.9/local/include/fflas-ffpack/field/rns-double.inl:95: > undefined reference to `GOMP_loop_ull_runtime_start' > > it goes on like that for several related errors. I've never seen this > one before. This is with gcc 7.4.0. > > This was doing a build from scratch for a release, in a clean Cygwin > install, so I'm not sure where the difference is. One thing I can > see, comparing to a previous build log of my development sage from one > of the 8.9 release candidates (with fflas-ffpack 2.4.3) that that > module was compiled *without* -fopenmp, whereas on my clean build it > is passing -fopenmp and I'm not sure where the difference is coming > from. Ahah, I can also see that in my development build, configuring fflas-ffpack output: checking for OpenMP... no whereas on my release build it has checking for OpenMP... yes For now I don't need or care about OpenMP support, as I have not tested that at all on Windows. I just need to figure out why that flag is being forcibly set... > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 1:19 AM Volker Braun wrote: > > > > The "master" git branch has been updated to Sage-8.9. 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 > > > > There was no change over 8.9.rc1 > > > > -- > > 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 sage-release+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > > To view this discussion on the web visit > > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/ea48d604-eff9-4b8c-ab44-a0929a7e99f9%40googlegroups.com. -- 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 sage-release+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/CAOTD34YKKrE2eudAi2BgkMj%2BekzTB5gPrws5jhK6%3DntfN%2Bh37g%40mail.gmail.com.
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
When building from scratch on Cygwin I am getting some errors related to OMP-related symbols being missing when linking a Sage module that uses fflas-ffpack; specifically sage.libs.linbox_flint_interface: [sagelib-8.9] g++ -shared -Wl,--enable-auto-image-base -L/opt/sagemath-8.9/local/lib -Wl,-rpath,/opt/sagemath-8.9/local/lib -L/opt/sagemath-8.9/local/lib -Wl,-rpath,/opt/sagemath-8.9/local/lib build/temp.cygwin-3.0.7-x86_64-2.7/build/cythonized/sage/libs/linbox/linbox_flint_interface.o -L/opt/sagemath-8.9/local/lib -L/opt/sagemath-8.9/local/lib/python2.7/config -L/opt/sagemath-8.9/local/lib -llinbox -lntl -liml -lfflas -lffpack -lgivaro -lblas -lflint -lmpfr -lgmp -lgmpxx -lstdc++ -lpython2.7 -o build/lib.cygwin-3.0.7-x86_64-2.7/sage/libs/linbox/linbox_flint_interface.dll [sagelib-8.9] build/temp.cygwin-3.0.7-x86_64-2.7/build/cythonized/sage/libs/linbox/linbox_flint_interface.o: In function `FFPACK::rns_double::init(unsigned long, unsigned long, double*, unsigned long, Givaro::Integer const*, unsigned long, unsigned long, bool) const [clone ._omp_fn.0]': [sagelib-8.9] /opt/sagemath-8.9/local/include/fflas-ffpack/field/rns-double.inl:95: undefined reference to `GOMP_loop_ull_runtime_start' it goes on like that for several related errors. I've never seen this one before. This is with gcc 7.4.0. This was doing a build from scratch for a release, in a clean Cygwin install, so I'm not sure where the difference is. One thing I can see, comparing to a previous build log of my development sage from one of the 8.9 release candidates (with fflas-ffpack 2.4.3) that that module was compiled *without* -fopenmp, whereas on my clean build it is passing -fopenmp and I'm not sure where the difference is coming from. On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 1:19 AM Volker Braun wrote: > > The "master" git branch has been updated to Sage-8.9. 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 > > There was no change over 8.9.rc1 > > -- > 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 sage-release+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/ea48d604-eff9-4b8c-ab44-a0929a7e99f9%40googlegroups.com. -- 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 sage-release+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/CAOTD34aMMVm9rUt057Vew3ON6VBcWQSva5zm3Hx%3D-StOeubSbw%40mail.gmail.com.
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 11:27 AM John Cremona wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 09:07, John Cremona wrote: >> >> >> >> On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 02:22, Dima Pasechnik wrote: >>> >>> something did not work as you installed libncurses5-dev, >>> as you still appear to miss >>> /usr/include/ncurses.h >>> (according to the new log: >>> configure:10315: checking for ncurses.h >>> configure:10315: result: no ) >>> >>> whereas https://packages.ubuntu.com/xenial/amd64/libncurses5-dev/filelist >>> has this file listed... >>> >>> Could you check that >>> /usr/include/ncurses.h >>> is present on the box? >> >> >> It was not, but I think that yesterday I was confused and had installed it >> on a different machine from the one I reported on (too many windows open). >> I just checked by manually installing that package on all 6 machines, which >> did do the install in 5 cases while on the 6th it was already there -- and >> that 6th machine was one for which the original build had worked OK! >> (Yesterday I said that all 6 had failed the same way but in fact 5 had, the >> 6th was still building when I reported). >> >> For completeness I am attaching he latest config.log. >> >> I think that Samuel might have hit on something I did wrong. My bash >> history shows >> >> 1989 tar zxf 8.9.tar.gz >> 1990 cd sage-8.9 >> 1991 make configure >> 1992 make >> >> with no ./configure step. I must have thought that "make configure" was >> instead of that... >> >> I'll restart the 5 builds after doing ./configure (after ncurses-clean and >> readline-clean), and report back. > > > All went successfully. My only remaining question is: is I had done > ./configure aafter make configure and before make, would the build have > worked (without inctalling those ubuntu packages which had somehow never been > needed for previous builds)? > "make configure" is only needed if Sage's main configure script is updated. Just look at the target "configure" in the main Makefile I guess there could be a bug introduced in commit 584735d9abe44b079df2566f7f73b6a69aaea0cf as I mentioned above in the thread. Feel free to open a ticket, saying that Sage's 8.9 readline builds underlinked on ubuntu xenial > John > >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:20 AM John Cremona wrote: >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 18:20, Dima Pasechnik wrote: >>> >> >>> >> Hi John, >>> >> >>> >> Do you have >>> >> libncurses5-dev >>> >> installed? >>> > >>> > >>> > No only the package without -dev. >>> > >>> >> >>> >> I guess not, as in your config.log I see >>> >> >>> >> conftest.cpp:56:21: fatal error: ncurses.h: No such file or directory >>> >> >>> >> and this header is provided by this package. >>> >> I'd say it's a bug in Ubunty xenial that libreadline-dev does not >>> >> depend on this package! >>> >> >>> >> Could you try installing it, then run >>> >> >>> >> make ncurses-clean >>> >> make readline-clean >>> >> ./configure >>> > >>> > >>> > I did that. >>> > >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> and check whether system-wide readline is picked up? >>> > >>> > >>> > Now config.log includes these lines >>> > >>> > configure:13881: === checking whether to install the readline SPKG === >>> > configure:13925: checking Installing ncurses? >>> > configure:13928: result: Yes. Install readline as well. >>> > configure:14176: === checking whether to install the pari SPKG === >>> > configure:14222: checking installing gmp/mpir or readline? >>> > configure:14224: result: yes; install pari as well >>> > configure:14565: result: using Sage's pari SPKG >>> > configure:14587: === checking whether to install the pari_nftables SPKG >>> > === >>> > configure:14631: checking installing pari? >>> > configure:14634: result: yes; install pari_nftables as well >>> > configure:14675: === checking whether to install the pkgconf SPKG === >>> > configure:14718: checking for pkg-config >= 0.29 >>> > configure:14794: result: /usr/bin/pkg-config >>> > configure:14807: result: using pkg-config from the system >>> > configure:14841: === checking whether to install the eclib SPKG === >>> > configure:14886: checking installing ntl or pari? >>> > configure:14889: result: yes; install eclib as well >>> > configure:14974: === checking whether to install the >>> > perl_term_readline_gnu SPKG === >>> > configure:15066: checking for perl module Term::ReadLine >>> > configure:15076: result: ok >>> > configure:15084: checking Term::ReadLine module... >>> > configure:15088: result: non-GNU >>> > >>> > which does not look right. Complete config.log isattached. >>> > >>> > >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> If yes, this should cure these machines... >>> >> >>> >> Dima >>> >> >>> >> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 9:01 PM John Cremona >>> >> wrote: >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 13:42, Dima Pasechnik wrote: >>> >> >> >>> >> >> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 7:43 PM John Cremona >>> >> >> wrote: >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 12:08, Dima Pasechnik >>> >>
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 09:07, John Cremona wrote: > > > On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 02:22, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > >> something did not work as you installed libncurses5-dev, >> as you still appear to miss >> /usr/include/ncurses.h >> (according to the new log: >> configure:10315: checking for ncurses.h >> configure:10315: result: no ) >> >> whereas https://packages.ubuntu.com/xenial/amd64/libncurses5-dev/filelist >> has this file listed... >> >> Could you check that >> /usr/include/ncurses.h >> is present on the box? >> > > It was not, but I think that yesterday I was confused and had installed it > on a different machine from the one I reported on (too many windows open). > I just checked by manually installing that package on all 6 machines, which > did do the install in 5 cases while on the 6th it was already there -- and > that 6th machine was one for which the original build had worked OK! > (Yesterday I said that all 6 had failed the same way but in fact 5 had, the > 6th was still building when I reported). > > For completeness I am attaching he latest config.log. > > I think that Samuel might have hit on something I did wrong. My bash > history shows > > 1989 tar zxf 8.9.tar.gz > 1990 cd sage-8.9 > 1991 make configure > 1992 make > > with no ./configure step. I must have thought that "make configure" was > instead of that... > > I'll restart the 5 builds after doing ./configure (after ncurses-clean and > readline-clean), and report back. > >> All went successfully. My only remaining question is: is I had done ./configure aafter make configure and before make, would the build have worked (without inctalling those ubuntu packages which had somehow never been needed for previous builds)? John > >> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:20 AM John Cremona >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 18:20, Dima Pasechnik wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi John, >> >> >> >> Do you have >> >> libncurses5-dev >> >> installed? >> > >> > >> > No only the package without -dev. >> > >> >> >> >> I guess not, as in your config.log I see >> >> >> >> conftest.cpp:56:21: fatal error: ncurses.h: No such file or directory >> >> >> >> and this header is provided by this package. >> >> I'd say it's a bug in Ubunty xenial that libreadline-dev does not >> >> depend on this package! >> >> >> >> Could you try installing it, then run >> >> >> >> make ncurses-clean >> >> make readline-clean >> >> ./configure >> > >> > >> > I did that. >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> and check whether system-wide readline is picked up? >> > >> > >> > Now config.log includes these lines >> > >> > configure:13881: === checking whether to install the readline SPKG === >> > configure:13925: checking Installing ncurses? >> > configure:13928: result: Yes. Install readline as well. >> > configure:14176: === checking whether to install the pari SPKG === >> > configure:14222: checking installing gmp/mpir or readline? >> > configure:14224: result: yes; install pari as well >> > configure:14565: result: using Sage's pari SPKG >> > configure:14587: === checking whether to install the pari_nftables SPKG >> === >> > configure:14631: checking installing pari? >> > configure:14634: result: yes; install pari_nftables as well >> > configure:14675: === checking whether to install the pkgconf SPKG === >> > configure:14718: checking for pkg-config >= 0.29 >> > configure:14794: result: /usr/bin/pkg-config >> > configure:14807: result: using pkg-config from the system >> > configure:14841: === checking whether to install the eclib SPKG === >> > configure:14886: checking installing ntl or pari? >> > configure:14889: result: yes; install eclib as well >> > configure:14974: === checking whether to install the >> perl_term_readline_gnu SPKG === >> > configure:15066: checking for perl module Term::ReadLine >> > configure:15076: result: ok >> > configure:15084: checking Term::ReadLine module... >> > configure:15088: result: non-GNU >> > >> > which does not look right. Complete config.log isattached. >> > >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> If yes, this should cure these machines... >> >> >> >> Dima >> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 9:01 PM John Cremona >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 13:42, Dima Pasechnik >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 7:43 PM John Cremona >> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 12:08, Dima Pasechnik >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 6:59 PM Dima Pasechnik >> wrote: >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > It seems that these machines don't have readline development >> files >> >> >> >> > properly installed. >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > Could you attach config.log ? >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> I mean the "main" config.log, not the ones from package builds. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Here it is. I looks as if some version of readline was >> downloaded and installed. >> >> >> no, it says that Sage's readline will be built, because according >> to the test, >> >> >> there is n
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
something did not work as you installed libncurses5-dev, as you still appear to miss /usr/include/ncurses.h (according to the new log: configure:10315: checking for ncurses.h configure:10315: result: no ) whereas https://packages.ubuntu.com/xenial/amd64/libncurses5-dev/filelist has this file listed... Could you check that /usr/include/ncurses.h is present on the box? On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 3:20 AM John Cremona wrote: > > > > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 18:20, Dima Pasechnik wrote: >> >> Hi John, >> >> Do you have >> libncurses5-dev >> installed? > > > No only the package without -dev. > >> >> I guess not, as in your config.log I see >> >> conftest.cpp:56:21: fatal error: ncurses.h: No such file or directory >> >> and this header is provided by this package. >> I'd say it's a bug in Ubunty xenial that libreadline-dev does not >> depend on this package! >> >> Could you try installing it, then run >> >> make ncurses-clean >> make readline-clean >> ./configure > > > I did that. > >> >> >> and check whether system-wide readline is picked up? > > > Now config.log includes these lines > > configure:13881: === checking whether to install the readline SPKG === > configure:13925: checking Installing ncurses? > configure:13928: result: Yes. Install readline as well. > configure:14176: === checking whether to install the pari SPKG === > configure:14222: checking installing gmp/mpir or readline? > configure:14224: result: yes; install pari as well > configure:14565: result: using Sage's pari SPKG > configure:14587: === checking whether to install the pari_nftables SPKG === > configure:14631: checking installing pari? > configure:14634: result: yes; install pari_nftables as well > configure:14675: === checking whether to install the pkgconf SPKG === > configure:14718: checking for pkg-config >= 0.29 > configure:14794: result: /usr/bin/pkg-config > configure:14807: result: using pkg-config from the system > configure:14841: === checking whether to install the eclib SPKG === > configure:14886: checking installing ntl or pari? > configure:14889: result: yes; install eclib as well > configure:14974: === checking whether to install the perl_term_readline_gnu > SPKG === > configure:15066: checking for perl module Term::ReadLine > configure:15076: result: ok > configure:15084: checking Term::ReadLine module... > configure:15088: result: non-GNU > > which does not look right. Complete config.log isattached. > > >> >> >> If yes, this should cure these machines... >> >> Dima >> >> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 9:01 PM John Cremona wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 13:42, Dima Pasechnik wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 7:43 PM John Cremona >> >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 12:08, Dima Pasechnik wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 6:59 PM Dima Pasechnik >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > It seems that these machines don't have readline development files >> >> >> > properly installed. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Could you attach config.log ? >> >> >> > >> >> >> I mean the "main" config.log, not the ones from package builds. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Here it is. I looks as if some version of readline was downloaded and >> >> > installed. >> >> no, it says that Sage's readline will be built, because according to the >> >> test, >> >> there is no ncurses (or tinfo) installed. >> >> >> >> So I am puzzled that you say that the machine has libreadline-dev >> >> installed. >> >> Could you post the contents of this package? >> > >> > >> > $ apt show libreadline-dev >> > Package: libreadline-dev >> > Version: 6.3-8ubuntu2 >> > Priority: optional >> > Section: libdevel >> > Source: readline6 >> > Origin: Ubuntu >> > Maintainer: Ubuntu Developers >> > Original-Maintainer: Matthias Klose >> > Bugs: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+filebug >> > Installed-Size: 6,144 B >> > Depends: libreadline6-dev (= 6.3-8ubuntu2) >> > Conflicts: libreadline-gplv2-dev >> > Supported: 9m >> > Download-Size: 992 B >> > APT-Manual-Installed: yes >> > APT-Sources: http://gb.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu xenial/main amd64 Packages >> > Description: GNU readline and history libraries, development files >> > The GNU readline library aids in the consistency of user interface >> > across discrete programs that need to provide a command line >> > interface. >> > . >> > The GNU history library provides a consistent user interface for >> > recalling lines of previously typed input. >> > . >> > This package is a dependency package depending on libreadline6-dev. >> > >> >> >> >> As well, I'd like to look at the output of >> >> >> >> $ ldd `find /usr -name libreadline.so` >> >> >> >> - which should look more or less like: >> >> >> >> linux-vdso.so.1 (0x7ffc2a2ce000) >> >> libtinfo.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtinfo.so.6 (0x79942a162000) >> >> libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x799429fa1000) >> >> /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x79942a3f3000) >> > >> > >> > It finds th
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
Le mar. 1 oct. 2019 à 12:38, John Cremona: > > For a change instead of updating the git repository to build 8.9 I downloaded > the file 8.9.tar.gz from the Releases section on github. After unpacking and > "make configure" I then did "make". Shouldn't there be an extra step between `make configure` and `make`? $ make configure $ ./configure $ 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, send an email to sage-release+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/CAEcArF17gdxyYposoiau0TYOKbZCZOL36bW-KwgNcny7XW7HrQ%40mail.gmail.com.
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
> On Sep 29, 2019, at 16:19 , Volker Braun wrote: > > The "master" git branch has been updated to Sage-8.9. 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 > > There was no change over 8.9.rc1 Built w/o problems from a fresh clone of the develop branch, and all tests (‘ptestlong’) passed! This is on three macOS systems: 10.11.6 (mid-2015 MBP, Quad-core Core i7) 10.13.6 (2017 iMac Pro, 18-core Xeon W) 10.14.6 (2017 MBP, Quad-core Core i7) Odd that, on 10.13.6, 8.9.rc1 had a repeatable failure testing (src/sage/libs/singular/polynomial.pyx), but not with 8.9. ?!? Justin -- Justin C. Walker, Curmudgeon at Large Director Institute for the Enhancement of the Director's Income -- In mathematics you don't understand things. You just get used to them. --John von Neumann -- -- 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 sage-release+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/EFF03370-C2ED-41E8-B0C0-0C1A9A74121D%40mac.com.
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
conda packages are available now. We are now patch free except for https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/28533 on Debian based distributions. There are a couple of warnings in werkzeug that was not present when I tested 8.8. Other than that, few test failures from 8.8 remain the same. Isuru. On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 8:01 AM John Cremona wrote: > > > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 13:42, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 7:43 PM John Cremona >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 12:08, Dima Pasechnik wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 6:59 PM Dima Pasechnik >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > It seems that these machines don't have readline development files >> >> > properly installed. >> >> > >> >> > Could you attach config.log ? >> >> > >> >> I mean the "main" config.log, not the ones from package builds. >> > >> > >> > Here it is. I looks as if some version of readline was downloaded and >> installed. >> no, it says that Sage's readline will be built, because according to the >> test, >> there is no ncurses (or tinfo) installed. >> >> So I am puzzled that you say that the machine has libreadline-dev >> installed. >> Could you post the contents of this package? >> > > $ apt show libreadline-dev > Package: libreadline-dev > Version: 6.3-8ubuntu2 > Priority: optional > Section: libdevel > Source: readline6 > Origin: Ubuntu > Maintainer: Ubuntu Developers > Original-Maintainer: Matthias Klose > Bugs: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+filebug > Installed-Size: 6,144 B > Depends: libreadline6-dev (= 6.3-8ubuntu2) > Conflicts: libreadline-gplv2-dev > Supported: 9m > Download-Size: 992 B > APT-Manual-Installed: yes > APT-Sources: http://gb.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu xenial/main amd64 > Packages > Description: GNU readline and history libraries, development files > The GNU readline library aids in the consistency of user interface > across discrete programs that need to provide a command line > interface. > . > The GNU history library provides a consistent user interface for > recalling lines of previously typed input. > . > This package is a dependency package depending on libreadline6-dev. > > >> As well, I'd like to look at the output of >> >> $ ldd `find /usr -name libreadline.so` >> >> - which should look more or less like: >> >> linux-vdso.so.1 (0x7ffc2a2ce000) >> libtinfo.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtinfo.so.6 (0x79942a162000) >> libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x799429fa1000) >> /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x79942a3f3000) >> > > It finds the system one as well as two sage installation ones. The system > one is like what you expected: > > /usr/local/sage/sage-8.8/local/lib/libreadline.so: > linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x7ffd459fe000) > libtinfo.so.6 => /usr/local/sage/sage-8.8/local/lib/libtinfo.so.6 > (0x7f9940e43000) > libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x7f9940a73000) > /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x7f99412d3000) > /usr/local/sage/sage-8.9/local/lib/libreadline.so: > linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x7ffe9e4ce000) > libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x7f00db8e3000) > /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x7f00dbf03000) > /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libreadline.so: > linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x7ffebbdd6000) > libtinfo.so.5 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtinfo.so.5 > (0x7f2e72d1b000) > libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x7f2e7294b000) > /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x7f2e73193000) > > >> >> I gather that the test we have for system's ncurses is too >> restrictive, and doesn't work >> even though it should... (So this is a potential Sage bug) >> >> To continue with this problem: >> Indeed, readline gets built by Sage, but it's a bit broken, as I >> gather it's not linked >> against libtinfo: >> >> To check this, please post the output of >> >> > $ ldd /usr/local/sage/sage-8.9/local/lib/libreadline.so.6 > linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x7ffce3bbe000) > libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x7fbee541b000) > /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x7fbee5a3b000) > > > >> >> I don't know why this doesn't work, it might be something went wrong in >> -- >> commit 584735d9abe44b079df2566f7f73b6a69aaea0cf >> Author: Dima Pasechnik >> Date: Wed May 1 10:58:00 2019 +0100 >> >> get termcap library name from the readline's configure >> >> >> (so this might be another Sage bug) >> >> >> Fixing at least one of these bugs might cure the systems you have, but >> more info is needed... >> What OS is that, precisely? >> > > $ lsb_release -a > No LSB modules are available. > Distributor ID: Ubuntu > Description:Ubuntu 16.04.6 LTS > Release:16.04 > Codename: xenial > > (Same for all 6 machines. I have tried to be consistent by reporting > answers to your questions all from the same one.) >
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
Hi John, Do you have libncurses5-dev installed? I guess not, as in your config.log I see conftest.cpp:56:21: fatal error: ncurses.h: No such file or directory and this header is provided by this package. I'd say it's a bug in Ubunty xenial that libreadline-dev does not depend on this package! Could you try installing it, then run make ncurses-clean make readline-clean ./configure and check whether system-wide readline is picked up? If yes, this should cure these machines... Dima On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 9:01 PM John Cremona wrote: > > > > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 13:42, Dima Pasechnik wrote: >> >> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 7:43 PM John Cremona wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 12:08, Dima Pasechnik wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 6:59 PM Dima Pasechnik wrote: >> >> > >> >> > It seems that these machines don't have readline development files >> >> > properly installed. >> >> > >> >> > Could you attach config.log ? >> >> > >> >> I mean the "main" config.log, not the ones from package builds. >> > >> > >> > Here it is. I looks as if some version of readline was downloaded and >> > installed. >> no, it says that Sage's readline will be built, because according to the >> test, >> there is no ncurses (or tinfo) installed. >> >> So I am puzzled that you say that the machine has libreadline-dev installed. >> Could you post the contents of this package? > > > $ apt show libreadline-dev > Package: libreadline-dev > Version: 6.3-8ubuntu2 > Priority: optional > Section: libdevel > Source: readline6 > Origin: Ubuntu > Maintainer: Ubuntu Developers > Original-Maintainer: Matthias Klose > Bugs: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+filebug > Installed-Size: 6,144 B > Depends: libreadline6-dev (= 6.3-8ubuntu2) > Conflicts: libreadline-gplv2-dev > Supported: 9m > Download-Size: 992 B > APT-Manual-Installed: yes > APT-Sources: http://gb.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu xenial/main amd64 Packages > Description: GNU readline and history libraries, development files > The GNU readline library aids in the consistency of user interface > across discrete programs that need to provide a command line > interface. > . > The GNU history library provides a consistent user interface for > recalling lines of previously typed input. > . > This package is a dependency package depending on libreadline6-dev. > >> >> As well, I'd like to look at the output of >> >> $ ldd `find /usr -name libreadline.so` >> >> - which should look more or less like: >> >> linux-vdso.so.1 (0x7ffc2a2ce000) >> libtinfo.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtinfo.so.6 (0x79942a162000) >> libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x799429fa1000) >> /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x79942a3f3000) > > > It finds the system one as well as two sage installation ones. The system > one is like what you expected: > > /usr/local/sage/sage-8.8/local/lib/libreadline.so: > linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x7ffd459fe000) > libtinfo.so.6 => /usr/local/sage/sage-8.8/local/lib/libtinfo.so.6 > (0x7f9940e43000) > libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x7f9940a73000) > /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x7f99412d3000) > /usr/local/sage/sage-8.9/local/lib/libreadline.so: > linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x7ffe9e4ce000) > libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x7f00db8e3000) > /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x7f00dbf03000) > /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libreadline.so: > linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x7ffebbdd6000) > libtinfo.so.5 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtinfo.so.5 > (0x7f2e72d1b000) > libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x7f2e7294b000) > /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x7f2e73193000) > >> >> >> I gather that the test we have for system's ncurses is too >> restrictive, and doesn't work >> even though it should... (So this is a potential Sage bug) >> >> To continue with this problem: >> Indeed, readline gets built by Sage, but it's a bit broken, as I >> gather it's not linked >> against libtinfo: >> >> To check this, please post the output of >> > > $ ldd /usr/local/sage/sage-8.9/local/lib/libreadline.so.6 > linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x7ffce3bbe000) > libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x7fbee541b000) > /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x7fbee5a3b000) > > >> >> >> I don't know why this doesn't work, it might be something went wrong in >> -- >> commit 584735d9abe44b079df2566f7f73b6a69aaea0cf >> Author: Dima Pasechnik >> Date: Wed May 1 10:58:00 2019 +0100 >> >> get termcap library name from the readline's configure >> >> >> (so this might be another Sage bug) >> >> >> Fixing at least one of these bugs might cure the systems you have, but >> more info is needed... >> What OS is that, precisely? > > > $ lsb_release -a > No LSB modules are available. > Distributor ID: Ubuntu > Description
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 13:42, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 7:43 PM John Cremona > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 12:08, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 6:59 PM Dima Pasechnik > wrote: > >> > > >> > It seems that these machines don't have readline development files > >> > properly installed. > >> > > >> > Could you attach config.log ? > >> > > >> I mean the "main" config.log, not the ones from package builds. > > > > > > Here it is. I looks as if some version of readline was downloaded and > installed. > no, it says that Sage's readline will be built, because according to the > test, > there is no ncurses (or tinfo) installed. > > So I am puzzled that you say that the machine has libreadline-dev > installed. > Could you post the contents of this package? > $ apt show libreadline-dev Package: libreadline-dev Version: 6.3-8ubuntu2 Priority: optional Section: libdevel Source: readline6 Origin: Ubuntu Maintainer: Ubuntu Developers Original-Maintainer: Matthias Klose Bugs: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+filebug Installed-Size: 6,144 B Depends: libreadline6-dev (= 6.3-8ubuntu2) Conflicts: libreadline-gplv2-dev Supported: 9m Download-Size: 992 B APT-Manual-Installed: yes APT-Sources: http://gb.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu xenial/main amd64 Packages Description: GNU readline and history libraries, development files The GNU readline library aids in the consistency of user interface across discrete programs that need to provide a command line interface. . The GNU history library provides a consistent user interface for recalling lines of previously typed input. . This package is a dependency package depending on libreadline6-dev. > As well, I'd like to look at the output of > > $ ldd `find /usr -name libreadline.so` > > - which should look more or less like: > > linux-vdso.so.1 (0x7ffc2a2ce000) > libtinfo.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtinfo.so.6 (0x79942a162000) > libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x799429fa1000) > /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x79942a3f3000) > It finds the system one as well as two sage installation ones. The system one is like what you expected: /usr/local/sage/sage-8.8/local/lib/libreadline.so: linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x7ffd459fe000) libtinfo.so.6 => /usr/local/sage/sage-8.8/local/lib/libtinfo.so.6 (0x7f9940e43000) libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x7f9940a73000) /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x7f99412d3000) /usr/local/sage/sage-8.9/local/lib/libreadline.so: linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x7ffe9e4ce000) libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x7f00db8e3000) /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x7f00dbf03000) /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libreadline.so: linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x7ffebbdd6000) libtinfo.so.5 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtinfo.so.5 (0x7f2e72d1b000) libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x7f2e7294b000) /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x7f2e73193000) > > I gather that the test we have for system's ncurses is too > restrictive, and doesn't work > even though it should... (So this is a potential Sage bug) > > To continue with this problem: > Indeed, readline gets built by Sage, but it's a bit broken, as I > gather it's not linked > against libtinfo: > > To check this, please post the output of > > $ ldd /usr/local/sage/sage-8.9/local/lib/libreadline.so.6 linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x7ffce3bbe000) libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x7fbee541b000) /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x7fbee5a3b000) > > I don't know why this doesn't work, it might be something went wrong in > -- > commit 584735d9abe44b079df2566f7f73b6a69aaea0cf > Author: Dima Pasechnik > Date: Wed May 1 10:58:00 2019 +0100 > > get termcap library name from the readline's configure > > > (so this might be another Sage bug) > > > Fixing at least one of these bugs might cure the systems you have, but > more info is needed... > What OS is that, precisely? > $ lsb_release -a No LSB modules are available. Distributor ID: Ubuntu Description:Ubuntu 16.04.6 LTS Release:16.04 Codename: xenial (Same for all 6 machines. I have tried to be consistent by reporting answers to your questions all from the same one.) > > Sorry for trouble, > Not at all, thanks for your help. On a more positive note, my python3 build on one of these machines was fine after git pull trac develop. > Dima > > > And Python2 does not do a very good job gathering what extra libs are > needed, > as its confugure output says > > checking how to link readline libs... -lreadline -ltermcap > > but then the error happens in the linking where one does not see > -ltermcap, but > rather -lcursesw > > (so this might be a Python2 bug) > > > > > > > I can of course install more ubu
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 7:43 PM John Cremona wrote: > > > > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 12:08, Dima Pasechnik wrote: >> >> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 6:59 PM Dima Pasechnik wrote: >> > >> > It seems that these machines don't have readline development files >> > properly installed. >> > >> > Could you attach config.log ? >> > >> I mean the "main" config.log, not the ones from package builds. > > > Here it is. I looks as if some version of readline was downloaded and > installed. no, it says that Sage's readline will be built, because according to the test, there is no ncurses (or tinfo) installed. So I am puzzled that you say that the machine has libreadline-dev installed. Could you post the contents of this package? As well, I'd like to look at the output of $ ldd `find /usr -name libreadline.so` - which should look more or less like: linux-vdso.so.1 (0x7ffc2a2ce000) libtinfo.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtinfo.so.6 (0x79942a162000) libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x799429fa1000) /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x79942a3f3000) I gather that the test we have for system's ncurses is too restrictive, and doesn't work even though it should... (So this is a potential Sage bug) To continue with this problem: Indeed, readline gets built by Sage, but it's a bit broken, as I gather it's not linked against libtinfo: To check this, please post the output of ldd /usr/local/sage/sage-8.9/local/lib/libreadline.so.6 I don't know why this doesn't work, it might be something went wrong in -- commit 584735d9abe44b079df2566f7f73b6a69aaea0cf Author: Dima Pasechnik Date: Wed May 1 10:58:00 2019 +0100 get termcap library name from the readline's configure (so this might be another Sage bug) Fixing at least one of these bugs might cure the systems you have, but more info is needed... What OS is that, precisely? Sorry for trouble, Dima And Python2 does not do a very good job gathering what extra libs are needed, as its confugure output says checking how to link readline libs... -lreadline -ltermcap but then the error happens in the linking where one does not see -ltermcap, but rather -lcursesw (so this might be a Python2 bug) > > I can of course install more ubuntu packages on these machines (though I do > have libreadline-dev installed already) but that's not quite the point here. > > John > >> >> > >> > On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 6:38 PM John Cremona wrote: >> > > >> > > For a change instead of updating the git repository to build 8.9 I >> > > downloaded the file 8.9.tar.gz from the Releases section on github. >> > > After unpacking and "make configure" I then did "make". On 6 different >> > > machines, all running ubuntu, all the builds failed with >> > > >> > > Error building Sage. >> > > >> > > The following package(s) may have failed to build (not necessarily >> > > during this run of 'make all-start'): >> > > >> > > * package: python2-2.7.15.p1 >> > > log file: /usr/local/sage/sage-8.9/logs/pkgs/python2-2.7.15.p1.log >> > > build directory: >> > > /usr/local/sage/sage-8.9/local/var/tmp/sage/build/python2-2.7.15.p1 >> > > >> > > One logfile is attached, they all fail the same easy: something about >> > > readline. >> > > >> > > The point here is not so much what I should do to get around this, but >> > > rather, what is wrong with "make configure; make" which led it to happen >> > > on machines where the prerequisites for Sage are certainly all installed >> > > since they all have working versions of 8.8 (and many previous, and in >> > > some cases 8.9 prereleases) built from the github repo. >> > > >> > > John >> > > >> > > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 09:07, Samuel Lelièvre >> > > wrote: >> > >> >> > >> ## Debian >> > >> >> > >> On Debian GNU/Linux 10 (buster), upgraded from >> > >> SageMath 8.9.rc0 via git and tested SageMath 8.9, >> > >> both py2 and py3. In both cases: >> > >> - `make`: ok >> > >> - `make testlong`: all tests pass! >> > >> >> > >> ## Cygwin >> > >> >> > >> On Cygwin64, tested SageMath 8.9, both py2 and py3, >> > >> with the following hardware and operating system: >> > >> >> > >> - laptop: HP ProBook 640 G1 >> > >> - processor: Intel Core i7-4610M, 3.00 GHz >> > >> - memory: 8 GB >> > >> - Cygwin64 version: CYGWIN_NT-6.1 3.0.7 (0.338/5/3) >> > >> - Windows: Windows 7 Professional (64-bit), Service Pack 1 >> > >> >> > >> ### Summary >> > >> >> > >> Here is a summary following this structure: >> > >> - [file] # [failures or timeouts during make testlong] >> > >> --> [result when tested individually]; [ticket references] >> > >> >> > >> - py2: >> > >> - src/sage/doctest/forker.py # 4 doctests failed >> > >> --> passes when tested individually >> > >> - src/sage/parallel/map_reduce.py # Timed out after testing finished >> > >> --> passes when tested individually; might be #27537 >> > >> >> > >> - py3 >> > >> - src/sage/coding/linear_co
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 6:59 PM Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > It seems that these machines don't have readline development files > properly installed. > > Could you attach config.log ? > I mean the "main" config.log, not the ones from package builds. > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 6:38 PM John Cremona wrote: > > > > For a change instead of updating the git repository to build 8.9 I > > downloaded the file 8.9.tar.gz from the Releases section on github. After > > unpacking and "make configure" I then did "make". On 6 different machines, > > all running ubuntu, all the builds failed with > > > > Error building Sage. > > > > The following package(s) may have failed to build (not necessarily > > during this run of 'make all-start'): > > > > * package: python2-2.7.15.p1 > > log file: /usr/local/sage/sage-8.9/logs/pkgs/python2-2.7.15.p1.log > > build directory: > > /usr/local/sage/sage-8.9/local/var/tmp/sage/build/python2-2.7.15.p1 > > > > One logfile is attached, they all fail the same easy: something about > > readline. > > > > The point here is not so much what I should do to get around this, but > > rather, what is wrong with "make configure; make" which led it to happen on > > machines where the prerequisites for Sage are certainly all installed since > > they all have working versions of 8.8 (and many previous, and in some cases > > 8.9 prereleases) built from the github repo. > > > > John > > > > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 09:07, Samuel Lelièvre > > wrote: > >> > >> ## Debian > >> > >> On Debian GNU/Linux 10 (buster), upgraded from > >> SageMath 8.9.rc0 via git and tested SageMath 8.9, > >> both py2 and py3. In both cases: > >> - `make`: ok > >> - `make testlong`: all tests pass! > >> > >> ## Cygwin > >> > >> On Cygwin64, tested SageMath 8.9, both py2 and py3, > >> with the following hardware and operating system: > >> > >> - laptop: HP ProBook 640 G1 > >> - processor: Intel Core i7-4610M, 3.00 GHz > >> - memory: 8 GB > >> - Cygwin64 version: CYGWIN_NT-6.1 3.0.7 (0.338/5/3) > >> - Windows: Windows 7 Professional (64-bit), Service Pack 1 > >> > >> ### Summary > >> > >> Here is a summary following this structure: > >> - [file] # [failures or timeouts during make testlong] > >> --> [result when tested individually]; [ticket references] > >> > >> - py2: > >> - src/sage/doctest/forker.py # 4 doctests failed > >> --> passes when tested individually > >> - src/sage/parallel/map_reduce.py # Timed out after testing finished > >> --> passes when tested individually; might be #27537 > >> > >> - py3 > >> - src/sage/coding/linear_code.py # Timed out > >> --> passes when tested individually; might be #26119 > >> - src/sage/libs/eclib/interface.py # 1 doctest failed > >> --> still fails when tested individually; see #28472 (positive review) > >> - src/sage/rings/finite_rings/finite_field_base.pyx # 1 doctest failed > >> --> passes when tested individually > >> - src/sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_rational_flint.pyx # 1 doctest > >> failed > >> --> still fails when tested individually; this is #28334 > >> - src/sage_setup/clean.py # 1 doctest failed > >> --> still fails when tested individually > >> > >> Read on for the details for each of py2 and py3. > >> > >> ### Python 2 > >> > >> Upgraded from SageMath 8.9.rc0 via git. > >> Ran `make`: success. Ran `make testlong` and individually > >> retested files that failed or timed out, see below. > >> > >> $ make testlong > >> ... > >> -- > >> sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/doctest/forker.py # 4 doctests > >> failed > >> sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/parallel/map_reduce.py # > >> Timed out after testing finished > >> -- > >> > >> $ ./sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/doctest/forker.py > >> Running doctests with ID 2019-10-01-08-19-19-2f160fbc. > >> Git branch: develop > >> Using --optional=build,dochtml,python2,sage > >> Doctesting 1 file. > >> sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/doctest/forker.py > >> [449 tests, 34.21 s] > >> -- > >> All tests passed! > >> -- > >> Total time for all tests: 81.7 seconds > >> cpu time: 5.5 seconds > >> cumulative wall time: 34.2 seconds > >> > >> $ ./sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/parallel/map_reduce.py > >> Running doctests with ID 2019-10-01-08-21-35-400c0707. > >> Git branch: develop > >> Using --optional=build,dochtml,python2,sage > >> Doctesting 1 file. > >> sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/parallel/map_reduce.py > >> [294 tests, 33.43 s] > >> -- > >> All tests passed! > >> -- > >> Total time for all test
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
It seems that these machines don't have readline development files properly installed. Could you attach config.log ? On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 6:38 PM John Cremona wrote: > > For a change instead of updating the git repository to build 8.9 I downloaded > the file 8.9.tar.gz from the Releases section on github. After unpacking and > "make configure" I then did "make". On 6 different machines, all running > ubuntu, all the builds failed with > > Error building Sage. > > The following package(s) may have failed to build (not necessarily > during this run of 'make all-start'): > > * package: python2-2.7.15.p1 > log file: /usr/local/sage/sage-8.9/logs/pkgs/python2-2.7.15.p1.log > build directory: > /usr/local/sage/sage-8.9/local/var/tmp/sage/build/python2-2.7.15.p1 > > One logfile is attached, they all fail the same easy: something about > readline. > > The point here is not so much what I should do to get around this, but > rather, what is wrong with "make configure; make" which led it to happen on > machines where the prerequisites for Sage are certainly all installed since > they all have working versions of 8.8 (and many previous, and in some cases > 8.9 prereleases) built from the github repo. > > John > > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 09:07, Samuel Lelièvre > wrote: >> >> ## Debian >> >> On Debian GNU/Linux 10 (buster), upgraded from >> SageMath 8.9.rc0 via git and tested SageMath 8.9, >> both py2 and py3. In both cases: >> - `make`: ok >> - `make testlong`: all tests pass! >> >> ## Cygwin >> >> On Cygwin64, tested SageMath 8.9, both py2 and py3, >> with the following hardware and operating system: >> >> - laptop: HP ProBook 640 G1 >> - processor: Intel Core i7-4610M, 3.00 GHz >> - memory: 8 GB >> - Cygwin64 version: CYGWIN_NT-6.1 3.0.7 (0.338/5/3) >> - Windows: Windows 7 Professional (64-bit), Service Pack 1 >> >> ### Summary >> >> Here is a summary following this structure: >> - [file] # [failures or timeouts during make testlong] >> --> [result when tested individually]; [ticket references] >> >> - py2: >> - src/sage/doctest/forker.py # 4 doctests failed >> --> passes when tested individually >> - src/sage/parallel/map_reduce.py # Timed out after testing finished >> --> passes when tested individually; might be #27537 >> >> - py3 >> - src/sage/coding/linear_code.py # Timed out >> --> passes when tested individually; might be #26119 >> - src/sage/libs/eclib/interface.py # 1 doctest failed >> --> still fails when tested individually; see #28472 (positive review) >> - src/sage/rings/finite_rings/finite_field_base.pyx # 1 doctest failed >> --> passes when tested individually >> - src/sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_rational_flint.pyx # 1 doctest >> failed >> --> still fails when tested individually; this is #28334 >> - src/sage_setup/clean.py # 1 doctest failed >> --> still fails when tested individually >> >> Read on for the details for each of py2 and py3. >> >> ### Python 2 >> >> Upgraded from SageMath 8.9.rc0 via git. >> Ran `make`: success. Ran `make testlong` and individually >> retested files that failed or timed out, see below. >> >> $ make testlong >> ... >> -- >> sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/doctest/forker.py # 4 doctests >> failed >> sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/parallel/map_reduce.py # >> Timed out after testing finished >> -- >> >> $ ./sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/doctest/forker.py >> Running doctests with ID 2019-10-01-08-19-19-2f160fbc. >> Git branch: develop >> Using --optional=build,dochtml,python2,sage >> Doctesting 1 file. >> sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/doctest/forker.py >> [449 tests, 34.21 s] >> -- >> All tests passed! >> -- >> Total time for all tests: 81.7 seconds >> cpu time: 5.5 seconds >> cumulative wall time: 34.2 seconds >> >> $ ./sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/parallel/map_reduce.py >> Running doctests with ID 2019-10-01-08-21-35-400c0707. >> Git branch: develop >> Using --optional=build,dochtml,python2,sage >> Doctesting 1 file. >> sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/parallel/map_reduce.py >> [294 tests, 33.43 s] >> -- >> All tests passed! >> -- >> Total time for all tests: 34.0 seconds >> cpu time: 5.2 seconds >> cumulative wall time: 33.4 seconds >> >> ### Python 3 >> >> Upgraded from SageMath 8.9.rc0 via git. >> Ran `make`: success. Ran `make testlong` and individually >> retested files that failed or timed out, see below. >> >> $ make testlong >> ... >>
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
## Debian On Debian GNU/Linux 10 (buster), upgraded from SageMath 8.9.rc0 via git and tested SageMath 8.9, both py2 and py3. In both cases: - `make`: ok - `make testlong`: all tests pass! ## Cygwin On Cygwin64, tested SageMath 8.9, both py2 and py3, with the following hardware and operating system: - laptop: HP ProBook 640 G1 - processor: Intel Core i7-4610M, 3.00 GHz - memory: 8 GB - Cygwin64 version: CYGWIN_NT-6.1 3.0.7 (0.338/5/3) - Windows: Windows 7 Professional (64-bit), Service Pack 1 ### Summary Here is a summary following this structure: - [file] # [failures or timeouts during make testlong] --> [result when tested individually]; [ticket references] - py2: - src/sage/doctest/forker.py # 4 doctests failed --> passes when tested individually - src/sage/parallel/map_reduce.py # Timed out after testing finished --> passes when tested individually; might be #27537 - py3 - src/sage/coding/linear_code.py # Timed out --> passes when tested individually; might be #26119 - src/sage/libs/eclib/interface.py # 1 doctest failed --> still fails when tested individually; see #28472 (positive review) - src/sage/rings/finite_rings/finite_field_base.pyx # 1 doctest failed --> passes when tested individually - src/sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_rational_flint.pyx # 1 doctest failed --> still fails when tested individually; this is #28334 - src/sage_setup/clean.py # 1 doctest failed --> still fails when tested individually Read on for the details for each of py2 and py3. ### Python 2 Upgraded from SageMath 8.9.rc0 via git. Ran `make`: success. Ran `make testlong` and individually retested files that failed or timed out, see below. $ make testlong ... -- sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/doctest/forker.py # 4 doctests failed sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/parallel/map_reduce.py # Timed out after testing finished -- $ ./sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/doctest/forker.py Running doctests with ID 2019-10-01-08-19-19-2f160fbc. Git branch: develop Using --optional=build,dochtml,python2,sage Doctesting 1 file. sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/doctest/forker.py [449 tests, 34.21 s] -- All tests passed! -- Total time for all tests: 81.7 seconds cpu time: 5.5 seconds cumulative wall time: 34.2 seconds $ ./sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/parallel/map_reduce.py Running doctests with ID 2019-10-01-08-21-35-400c0707. Git branch: develop Using --optional=build,dochtml,python2,sage Doctesting 1 file. sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/parallel/map_reduce.py [294 tests, 33.43 s] -- All tests passed! -- Total time for all tests: 34.0 seconds cpu time: 5.2 seconds cumulative wall time: 33.4 seconds ### Python 3 Upgraded from SageMath 8.9.rc0 via git. Ran `make`: success. Ran `make testlong` and individually retested files that failed or timed out, see below. $ make testlong ... -- sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/coding/linear_code.py # Timed out sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/libs/eclib/interface.py # 1 doctest failed sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/rings/finite_rings/finite_field_base.pyx # 1 doctest failed sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_rational_flint.pyx # 1 doctest failed sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage_setup/clean.py # 1 doctest failed -- $ ./sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/coding/linear_code.py Running doctests with ID 2019-10-01-07-58-10-19e3fc53. Git branch: develop Using --optional=build,dochtml,python2,sage Doctesting 1 file. sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/coding/linear_code.py [749 tests, 28.33 s] -- All tests passed! -- Total time for all tests: 29.2 seconds cpu time: 25.8 seconds cumulative wall time: 28.3 seconds $ ./sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/libs/eclib/interface.py Running doctests with ID 2019-10-01-07-58-59-bd646d17. Git branch: develop Using --optional=build,dochtml,python2,sage Doctesting 1 file. sage -t --long --warn-long 87.2 src/sage/libs/eclib/interface.py ** File "src/sage/libs/eclib/interface.py", line 597, in sage.libs.eclib.interface.mwrank_EllipticCurve.saturate Failed example: E.saturation([Q1,Q2])
Re: [sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
Le lun. 30 sept. 2019 à 01:19, Volker Braun: > > The "master" git branch has been updated to Sage-8.9. [...] > > There was no change over 8.9.rc1 Thanks for the release! Will there be py2 and py3 binaries for SageMath 8.9? Also, a problem some users faced with the macOS binary for SageMath 8.8 was as follows: installing extra packages with pip requires to first run `sage -i openssl` followed by `sage -f python2`, but this would fail to build scipy 1.2.0 and leave users with a nonworking Sage. Matthias Koeppe diagnosed the likely cause and opened an issue about it on binary-pkg: https://github.com/sagemath/binary-pkg/issues/19 -- 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 sage-release+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/CAEcArF2SAxi8_Om7dmm9Qfor0pxo0H%3D1faBYjGzY5A%2BUDWpnsQ%40mail.gmail.com.
[sage-release] Sage 8.9 released
The "master" git branch has been updated to Sage-8.9. 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 There was no change over 8.9.rc1 -- 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 sage-release+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/ea48d604-eff9-4b8c-ab44-a0929a7e99f9%40googlegroups.com.
