Opened 9 years ago

Closed 9 years ago

#12363 closed enhancement (fixed)

Upgrade PARI to 2.5.1

Reported by: jdemeyer Owned by: tbd
Priority: major Milestone: sage-5.0
Component: packages: standard Keywords:
Cc: Merged in: sage-5.0.beta4
Authors: Jeroen Demeyer Reviewers: John Palmieri
Report Upstream: Completely fixed; Fix reported upstream Work issues:
Branch: Commit:
Dependencies: Stopgaps:

Status badges

Description (last modified by jdemeyer)

PARI-2.5.1 has been released: http://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/pub/pari/unix/pari-2.5.1.tar.gz

We should upgrade PARI in Sage to this latest version. It also happens that this is needed to compile PARI with gcc-4.6.2 (see #12369).

spkg: http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/jdemeyer/spkg/pari-2.5.1.p0.spkg (changes for reviewing: pari-2.5.1.p0.diff)

apply: 12363_doctest.patch

In an earlier version of this spkg, an upstream bug was discovered which is now fixed: http://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1276

Attachments (2)

12363_doctest.patch (876 bytes) - added by jdemeyer 9 years ago.
pari-2.5.1.p0.diff (9.6 KB) - added by jdemeyer 9 years ago.
Diff for the pari spkg, for review only

Download all attachments as: .zip

Change History (16)

comment:1 Changed 9 years ago by jdemeyer

  • Description modified (diff)
  • Report Upstream changed from N/A to Reported upstream. Little or no feedback.

comment:2 Changed 9 years ago by jhpalmieri

Two quick comments:

  • the linked gzipped tar file is missing the 'data' directory, which causes some doctests to fail. (This caused me a lot of confusion on #12315.)
  • your spkg file is huge!

comment:3 Changed 9 years ago by jdemeyer

  • Report Upstream changed from Reported upstream. Little or no feedback. to Reported upstream. Developers acknowledge bug.

Well, there is a reason this ticket isn't "needs review", sorry for the confusion.

comment:4 Changed 9 years ago by jdemeyer

  • Description modified (diff)

Changed 9 years ago by jdemeyer

comment:5 Changed 9 years ago by jdemeyer

  • Authors set to Jeroen Demeyer
  • Description modified (diff)
  • Report Upstream changed from Reported upstream. Developers acknowledge bug. to Completely fixed; Fix reported upstream

comment:6 Changed 9 years ago by jdemeyer

  • Description modified (diff)

comment:7 Changed 9 years ago by jdemeyer

  • Description modified (diff)

Changed 9 years ago by jdemeyer

Diff for the pari spkg, for review only

comment:8 Changed 9 years ago by jdemeyer

  • Description modified (diff)
  • Status changed from new to needs_review

comment:9 follow-up: Changed 9 years ago by jhpalmieri

In principle this looks okay and it works on a few different machines. Skynet seems to be down right now, so I can't test it on a very wide range of platforms, though.

comment:10 in reply to: ↑ 9 Changed 9 years ago by jdemeyer

Replying to jhpalmieri:

Skynet seems to be down right now.

It seems to work now. Anyway, I already tested this on most of the Skynet machines and once it's merged it will be tested again before the release.

comment:11 Changed 9 years ago by jhpalmieri

Regarding the doctest patch, can you explain mathematically why this is the right thing to do?

comment:12 Changed 9 years ago by jdemeyer

Let K be the number field Q[y]/(y2 + y + 1).

Let L be the relative number field K[x]/(x4 + y*x + 2).

We can also write L = {Q[y]/(y2 + y + 1)}[x]/(x4 + y*x + 2) (braces added for clarity).

Now consider the element x*y in L, we ask for its relative representation in PARI. Given the above, the correct answer is

Mod(Mod(y, y^2 + y + 1)*x, x^4 + y*x + 2)

So, the new answer to the doctest is more correct than the old.

comment:13 Changed 9 years ago by jhpalmieri

  • Reviewers set to John Palmieri
  • Status changed from needs_review to positive_review

Okay, that sounds good to me.

comment:14 Changed 9 years ago by jdemeyer

  • Merged in set to sage-5.0.beta4
  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Status changed from positive_review to closed
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.