Changes between Version 1 and Version 2 of Ticket #11616


Ignore:
Timestamp:
07/22/11 21:20:43 (3 years ago)
Author:
leif
Comment:

Setting this to "needs review" since the MPIR 2.1.3.p4 from #8664 got positive review again, though so far only by a single reviewer.

The current packages are mainly meant for testing the new upstream releases, hopefully on a variety of platforms supported by Sage; some improvements or changes to Sage's part will most probably follow.

It would just be nice to relatively early know whether any of them (more important, MPIR 2.4.0) causes any problems on one of our platforms. (MPIR 2.5.0 is scheduled for September 1st, which isn't that far...)

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • Ticket #11616

    • Property Status changed from new to needs_review
  • Ticket #11616 – Description

    v1 v2  
    11This is a follow-up to #8664. 
    22 
    3 The following spkgs are based on the '''not yet positively reviewed''' MPIR 2.1.3.p4 spkg from #8664: 
     3The following spkgs are based on the (not yet merged) MPIR 2.1.3.p4 spkg from #8664: 
    44 
    55 * http://spkg-upload.googlecode.com/files/mpir-2.3.1.p0.spkg [[BR]] 
     
    1111You may want to give them a try ''now'' though. (The former is just intended as a "fallback" spkg in case problems introduced in the latter should arise.) 
    1212 
    13 The list of changes between MPIR 2.1.3 (more precisely, 2.1.1) and MPIR 2.4.0 is fairly long, so I haven't put them into the description. I'll perhaps attach them as a text file later. 
     13The list of changes between MPIR 2.1.3 (more precisely, 2.1.1) and MPIR 2.4.0 is fairly long, so I haven't put them into the description, but [attachment:MPIR_upstream_changes_between_2.1.1_and_2.4.0.txt attached them] in a plain text file. 
    1414 
    1515For instructions on how to install / test the spkgs please see #8664, as these two also require the new GMP-ECM 6.3.p2 spkg from #5847 and two patches to the Sage library (one from each ticket); a Sage 4.7.1.rc0 (Sage library) spkg with these two patches already applied [comment:ticket:8664:114 is also available] ''there''. 
     16 
     17Note that #5847 technically again '''needs review''' because I had to rebase the trivial one-line patch attached there. 
    1618 
    1719----