make PB when installing from source
I tried to upgrade from SageMath 9.5 to 9.6 without success. because the code below generate error with 9.5:TypeError: unable to find a common ring for all elements
@interact
def _(v=('vector', input_grid(1, 3, default=[[1,2,3]], to_value=lambda x: vector(flatten(x))))):
print(v.norm())
HI
WSL2,W11,Ubuntu 20.04
I wanted to keep the old version 9.5 which is in the sage directory,so I renamed sage to sage-9.5 and then rename the sage-9.6 directory to sage. the compilation time was much lower than usual, moreover the make does not signal an error. I had thought that maybe it was because I was using make -j32 ,so the compilation takes 30 minutes which is suspicious but I got the same PB with make alone which take 111 min only !.
real 111m46.476s
user 114m7.313s
sys 5m34.121s
Sage build/upgrade complete!
make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/ortollj/sage-9.6'
there are some messages in configure process
config.status: creating convenience symlink venv -> local/var/lib/sage/venv-python3.8
configure:
notice: the following SPKGs did not find equivalent system packages:
4ti2 coxeter3 gp2c igraph libsemigroups lrslib pari_elldata pari_galpol pari_nftables pari_seadata polymake _recommended
checking for the package system in use... debian
configure:
hint: installing the following system packages, if not
already present, may provide additional optional features:
$ sudo apt-get update
$ sudo apt-get install 4ti2 pari-gp2c libigraph-dev lrslib polymake libpolymake-dev default-jdk libavdevice-dev
configure:
hint: After installation, re-run configure using:
$ ./config.status --recheck && ./config.status
but when i run the recommended commands I got :0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
I forgot to tell the message I got:
The code with interact still generate the same error in SageMath 9.6 in my computer than in 9.5 but this code in SageCell don't produce any error , why ?
when I type
version()
on sagecell I got:'SageMath version 9.6, Release Date: 2022-05-15' same as mine.
@slelievre : do I have to open a new issue for this ?