headers
Steven Trogdon | 8 Sep 2010 15:00
Picon

[sage-on-gentoo] numpy-1.4.1/scipy-0.8.0

Hi everyone,

I performed the subject upgrade and I have one test that fails on my 32bit  
chroot that seems to be out of the ordinary. There is no problem with the test  
on amd64, at least here there isn't.

sage -t  -force_lib  
"devel/sage/sage/schemes/hyperelliptic_curves/hyperelliptic_finite_field.py"
**********************************************************************
File 

"/usr/share/sage/devel/sage/sage/schemes/hyperelliptic_curves/hyperelliptic_finite_field.py",

line 315:
     sage: len(C.points())
Exception raised:
     Traceback (most recent call last):
       File "/usr/bin/ncadoctest.py", line 1231, in run_one_test
         self.run_one_example(test, example, filename, compileflags)
       File "/usr/bin/sagedoctest.py", line 38, in run_one_example
         OrigDocTestRunner.run_one_example(self, test, example, filename,  
compileflags)
       File "/usr/bin/ncadoctest.py", line 1172, in run_one_example
         compileflags, 1) in test.globs
       File "<doctest __main__.example_6[7]>", line 1, in <module>
         len(C.points())###line 315:
     sage: len(C.points())
       File 

"/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/sage/schemes/hyperelliptic_curves/hyperelliptic_finite_field.py",
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
François Bissey | 9 Sep 2010 10:47
Picon
Picon

Re: [sage-on-gentoo] numpy-1.4.1/scipy-0.8.0

> Hi everyone,
> 
> I performed the subject upgrade and I have one test that fails on my 32bit
> chroot that seems to be out of the ordinary. There is no problem with the
> test on amd64, at least here there isn't.
> 
> sage -t  -force_lib
> "devel/sage/sage/schemes/hyperelliptic_curves/hyperelliptic_finite_field.py
> " **********************************************************************
> File
> "/usr/share/sage/devel/sage/sage/schemes/hyperelliptic_curves/hyperelliptic
> _finite_field.py", line 315:
>      sage: len(C.points())
> Exception raised:
>      Traceback (most recent call last):
>        File "/usr/bin/ncadoctest.py", line 1231, in run_one_test
>          self.run_one_example(test, example, filename, compileflags)
>        File "/usr/bin/sagedoctest.py", line 38, in run_one_example
>          OrigDocTestRunner.run_one_example(self, test, example, filename,
> compileflags)
>        File "/usr/bin/ncadoctest.py", line 1172, in run_one_example
>          compileflags, 1) in test.globs
>        File "<doctest __main__.example_6[7]>", line 1, in <module>
>          len(C.points())###line 315:
>      sage: len(C.points())
>        File
> "/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/sage/schemes/hyperelliptic_curves/hyperel
> liptic_finite_field.py", line 327, in points
>          self.__points = self._points_fast_sqrt() # this is fast using Zech
> logarithms
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Steven Trogdon | 9 Sep 2010 16:22
Picon

Re: [sage-on-gentoo] numpy-1.4.1/scipy-0.8.0

On 09/09/2010 03:47:27 AM, François Bissey wrote:

> Hi Steve,
> 
> just to be clear, when you enter the data of the test manually in sage there
> is no problems?
> We already have one test like that, and there are a few reports of phantom
> failing tests on sage-devel so it is possible.
> 
> Francois
> 

François ,

When the following

             sage: x = polygen(GF(121, 'a'))
             sage: C = HyperellipticCurve(x^5 + x - 1, x^2 + 2)
             sage: len(C.points())
             122

is entered manually I get the expected result. The last line of the sage input  
is where

  sage -t -force_lib  
"devel/sage/sage/schemes/hyperelliptic_curves/hyperelliptic_finite_field.py"

fails. I downgraded to

sage-doc-4.5.2-r1
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
François Bissey | 10 Sep 2010 12:47
Picon
Picon

Re: [sage-on-gentoo] numpy-1.4.1/scipy-0.8.0

> On 09/09/2010 03:47:27 AM, François Bissey wrote:
> > Hi Steve,
> > 
> > just to be clear, when you enter the data of the test manually in sage
> > there is no problems?
> > We already have one test like that, and there are a few reports of
> > phantom failing tests on sage-devel so it is possible.
> > 
> > Francois
> 
> François ,
> 
> When the following
> 
>              sage: x = polygen(GF(121, 'a'))
>              sage: C = HyperellipticCurve(x^5 + x - 1, x^2 + 2)
>              sage: len(C.points())
>              122
> 
> is entered manually I get the expected result. The last line of the sage
> input is where
> 
>   sage -t -force_lib
> "devel/sage/sage/schemes/hyperelliptic_curves/hyperelliptic_finite_field.py
> "
> 
> fails. I downgraded to
> 
> sage-doc-4.5.2-r1
> numpy-1.3.0-r2
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Steven Trogdon | 11 Sep 2010 18:56
Picon

Re: [sage-on-gentoo] numpy-1.4.1/scipy-0.8.0

On 09/10/2010 05:47:10 AM, François Bissey wrote:
>> On 09/09/2010 03:47:27 AM, François Bissey wrote:
>> > Hi Steve,
>> >
>> > just to be clear, when you enter the data of the test manually in sage
>> > there is no problems?
>> > We already have one test like that, and there are a few reports of
>> > phantom failing tests on sage-devel so it is possible.
>> >
>> > Francois
>> 
>> François ,
>> 
>> When the following
>> 
>>              sage: x = polygen(GF(121, 'a'))
>>              sage: C = HyperellipticCurve(x^5 + x - 1, x^2 + 2)
>>              sage: len(C.points())
>>              122
>> 
>> is entered manually I get the expected result. The last line of the sage
>> input is where
>> 
>>   sage -t -force_lib
>> "devel/sage/sage/schemes/hyperelliptic_curves/hyperelliptic_finite_field.py
>> "
>> 
>> fails. I downgraded to
>> 
>> sage-doc-4.5.2-r1
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
justin | 17 Sep 2010 10:00
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Please Fix

http://paste.pocoo.org/show/262909/
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
François Bissey | 17 Sep 2010 10:53
Picon
Picon

Re: Please Fix

> http://paste.pocoo.org/show/262909/

I fixed that yesterday.

Francois
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
justin | 17 Sep 2010 19:52
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: Please Fix

On 17/09/10 10:53, François Bissey wrote:
>> http://paste.pocoo.org/show/262909/
> 
> I fixed that yesterday.
> 
> Francois
> 
thanks
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Thomas Kahle | 24 Sep 2010 16:54
Picon
Picon
Gravatar

RFC sci-mathematics/axiom

Hi all,

I consider my tries of reviving sci-mathematics/axiom as failed. The
current version in the tree does not compile per
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=326575 . I tried to bump the
package, but as we found in
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=336789 the internal copy of gnu
common lisp that axiom tries to build (gcl is dead-upstream hard masked
in the tree) requires <dev-libs/gmp-5, otherwise it will try to build an
internal copy of gmp-4 which will fail, and is unacceptable. I don't
know if it is worth the effort to try to beat it to work with the
system's gmp. This would probably end up in reviving gcl ourselves.

What is a proper course of action here?  Should we last-rite it or at
least package.mask it to see what upstream does about their dead lisp
compiler ?

Cheers,
Thomas

--

-- 
Thomas Kahle
Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |
headers
François Bissey | 26 Sep 2010 10:14
Picon
Picon

Re: RFC sci-mathematics/axiom

> Hi all,
> 
> I consider my tries of reviving sci-mathematics/axiom as failed. The
> current version in the tree does not compile per
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=326575 . I tried to bump the
> package, but as we found in
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=336789 the internal copy of gnu
> common lisp that axiom tries to build (gcl is dead-upstream hard masked
> in the tree) requires <dev-libs/gmp-5, otherwise it will try to build an
> internal copy of gmp-4 which will fail, and is unacceptable. I don't
> know if it is worth the effort to try to beat it to work with the
> system's gmp. This would probably end up in reviving gcl ourselves.
> 
> What is a proper course of action here?  Should we last-rite it or at
> least package.mask it to see what upstream does about their dead lisp
> compiler ?
> 
Hi Thomas,

Have you tried to contact upstream (Tim Daly) to see if being packaged in
a distro is something they are interested in.
I personally would last rite it and possibly revisit the situation every so 
often. If it doesn't even build I am not sure there is a point in keeping it
in the tree.

Francois
Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |

Gmane