-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 449
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Remove Guava from standard Sage #5701
Comments
Attachment: trac_5701-guava-extraction.patch.gz based on 4.0.a0 |
comment:1
Attachment: trac_5701-ref-suggestions.patch.gz I have run tests and checked the code here, and everything seems fine, with the following caveat: I did not run tests on a fresh install, i.e. I ran tests on a system with Guava still installed. I will give this a positive review, pending the tests passing on a system with the right GAP spkg and workspace setup, and wdj will follow up on #6094. |
Attachment: trac_5701-guava-extraction2.patch.gz to be applied after the other 2 patches (all three can be based on 4.0.rc0) |
comment:2
I just added a third patch. If you remove guava from gap*/pkg, reset the GAP workspace, and then apply these three patches then all tests pass on a 64bit ubuntu 9.04 machine. |
comment:3
Since you are adding an input to |
Attachment: trac_5701-ref-suggestions2.patch.gz to be applied after the others. |
comment:4
Adds 2 line description to linear_code.py docstring following referees suggestion. |
Author: David Joyner |
Merged: 4.0.2.alpha1 |
Reviewer: Robert Miller |
Changed merged from 4.0.2.alpha1 to 4.0.2.alpha0 |
We currently ship Guava per default in the GAP.spkg. But Guava is limited in functionality, i.e. compared to Magma see http://wiki.sagemath.org/magma#CodingTheory for a list by wdj, and tends to crash at exit, too.
The following doctests fail when guava is removed from the GAP spkg.
Cheers,
Michael
CC: @wdjoyner
Component: packages: standard
Author: David Joyner
Reviewer: Robert Miller
Merged: 4.0.2.alpha0
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/5701
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: