From: | VulK <etn45p4m@×××××.com> | ||
---|---|---|---|

To: | gentoo-science@l.g.o | ||

Subject: | Re: [gentoo-science] sage queues |
||

Date: | Tue, 09 Aug 2011 05:08:56 | ||

Message-Id: | 20110809050744.GF24561@mistaya.nunet.neu.edu |
||

In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-science] sage queues by fbissey@slingshot.co.nz |

1 | Hi, |

2 | Thank you for the explanation: I kind of guessed that some part of sage were |

3 | omitted to adapt the two packaging system but your explanation gave me the |

4 | details I was missing. |

5 | As you said the combinat queue is/should be a real mess of continuous |

6 | updates (at least this is what I was told) so I am not entirely sure how well |

7 | an e-build would perform, in case you decide to spend some time on it I will |

8 | gladly be a guinea pig for testing it out. |

9 | I do not understand sage package system in details so my request may just be |

10 | stupid but is it possible to produce separate ebuilds for the different part |

11 | of sage that are now stripped? If not for all of those can this be done for the |

12 | various packages in $SAGE_ROOT/devel ? If an e-build is not feasible, can |

13 | USE flags be used to select which extensions to include at compile time? |

14 | Thank you |

15 | S. |

16 | |

17 | |

18 | * fbissey@××××××××××××.nz <fbissey@××××××××××××.nz> [2011-08-09 16:29:52]: |

19 | |

20 | > Quoting VulK <etn45p4m@×××××.com>: |

21 | > |

22 | > > Dear all, |

23 | > > this is my first post to gentoo-science and I am writing because I have some |

24 | > > problems running experimental code from the sage project. |

25 | > > My issue is the following: |

26 | > > I have sci-mathematics/sage-4.7-r2 installed from the sage-on-gentoo overlay |

27 | > > and I would like to install the combinat queue; I am following these |

28 | > > instructions: http://wiki.sagemath.org/combinat/MercurialStepByStep |

29 | > > The command I am supposed to run is |

30 | > > # sage -combinat install |

31 | > > unfortunately -combinat is not recognized by sage as a valid option. I |

32 | > > browsed a little bit around the filesystem and I noticed that $SAGE_ROOT is |

33 | > > empty (except for some documentation) while on other installations of sage |

34 | > > (not using the ebuilds) there is plenty of stuff including a devel/combinat |

35 | > > folder. |

36 | > > Is there an option I can use when installing sage to allow for experimental |

37 | > > sources? or is there any other way I can use queues without installing sage |

38 | > > not using portage? |

39 | > > Thanks |

40 | > > VulK |

41 | > > |

42 | > > PS: some weird behaviour: |

43 | > > |

44 | > > % sage -h |

45 | > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- |

46 | > > | Sage Version 4.7, Release Date: 2011-05-23 | |

47 | > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- |

48 | > > |

49 | > > Optional arguments: |

50 | > > file.<sage|py|spyx> -- run given .sage, .py or .spyx files |

51 | > > -advanced -- list all command line options |

52 | > > -c <cmd> -- Evaluates cmd as sage code |

53 | > > -experimental -- list all experimental packages that can be installed |

54 | > > -gap [...] -- run Sage's Gap with given arguments |

55 | > > -gp [...] -- run Sage's PARI/GP calculator with given arguments |

56 | > > -h, -? -- print this help message |

57 | > > -i [packages] -- install the given Sage packages |

58 | > > -inotebook [...] -- start the *insecure* Sage notebook |

59 | > > -maxima [...] -- run Sage's Maxima with given arguments |

60 | > > -mwrank [...] -- run Sage's mwrank with given arguments |

61 | > > -n, -notebook [...] -- start the Sage notebook (options are the same |

62 | > > as for the notebook command in Sage) |

63 | > > -optional -- list all optional packages that can be installed |

64 | > > -python [...] -- run the Python interpreter |

65 | > > -R [...] -- run Sage's R with given arguments |

66 | > > -singular [...] -- run Sage's singular with given arguments |

67 | > > -root -- print the Sage root directory |

68 | > > -t [options] <files|dir> |

69 | > > -- test examples in .py, .pyx, .sage or .tex files |

70 | > > options: |

71 | > > -long -- include lines with the phrase |

72 | > > 'long time' |

73 | > > -verbose -- print debugging output during |

74 | > > the test |

75 | > > -optional -- also test all #optional examples |

76 | > > -only-optional <tag1,...,tagn> -- only run tests |

77 | > > including one of the #optional tags |

78 | > > -randorder[=seed] -- randomize order of tests |

79 | > > -v, -version -- print the Sage version |

80 | > > |

81 | > > % sage -experimental |

82 | > > sage-run received unknown option: -experimental |

83 | > > usage: sage [options] |

84 | > > Try 'sage -h' for more information. |

85 | > |

86 | > Hi VuLK, |

87 | > |

88 | > unfortunately at this stage we do not support that in sage-on-gentoo. |

89 | > Actually the version we ship is stripped down in some ways. |

90 | > Let me explain: |

91 | > sage has its own upgrade system, it wouldn't work in the kind of |

92 | > installation we |

93 | > do and that would mean changing, adding and deleting files in the |

94 | > system outside |

95 | > the control of the package manager. We definitely don't want to do that. So we |

96 | > removed the options for sage upgrade. The only option to upgrade is |

97 | > portage/package-core etc... |

98 | > |

99 | > There are options to help you create spkg, install spkg and so on, we could |

100 | > probably give back the one to create spkg but we otherwise completely |

101 | > circumvent the sage build system so the corresponding options are gone. |

102 | > |

103 | > The main problem is that sage's normal distribution model is trying to be |

104 | > developer friendly but isn't distro friendly. We coerced it into a |

105 | > distro which |

106 | > makes it more appealing for an end user to try but it is stripped of |

107 | > some of the |

108 | > dev-friendly features. |

109 | > |

110 | > There are advantages and disadvantages for both models. We can be/are |

111 | > more up to |

112 | > date than sage with some packages. If I patch something I literally have to |

113 | > reinstall the whole of of the sage spkg from portage, the equivalent of sage |

114 | > -ba while from vanilla sage you could use sage -b and only rebuild the |

115 | > necessary bits. |

116 | > |

117 | > Now you are the first person making this kind of request about using something |

118 | > like the combinat queue. We probably can give you an ebuild pulling the |

119 | > combinat queue. There are just two caveats here: |

120 | > 1) it may take a bit of time for us to come up with something. |

121 | > 2) because I expect the queue to be somewhat in flux it would have to be a hot |

122 | > ebuild of some kind. If you can live with that we can probably work something |

123 | > out. |

124 | > |

125 | > Francois |

126 | > |

127 | > |

128 | > |

129 | > |

Subject | Author |
---|---|

Re: [gentoo-science] sage queues | fbissey@××××××××××××.nz |

Re: [gentoo-science] sage queues | Christopher Schwan <cschwan@××××××××××××××××××.de> |

All times displayed are in UTC (GMT+0).

Contents reflect the opinion of the author, not the Gentoo project or the Gentoo Foundation.

Gentoo is a trademark of the Gentoo Foundation, Inc. The contents of this document, unless otherwise expressly stated, are licensed under the CC-BY-SA-4.0 license. The Gentoo Name and Logo Usage Guidelines apply.