Opened 9 years ago

Closed 9 years ago

#14531 closed defect (fixed)

Gurobi is not built anymore because of a typo !

Reported by: Nathann Cohen Owned by: Nathann Cohen
Priority: major Milestone: sage-5.10
Component: linear programming Keywords:
Cc: Merged in: sage-5.10.beta2
Authors: Nathann Cohen Reviewers: Leif Leonhardy
Report Upstream: N/A Work issues:
Branch: Commit:
Dependencies: Stopgaps:

Status badges

Description

Looks like the value of SAGE_INC used to end with a '/', and that changed. As a result the Gurobi backend is not built anymore !

As reported on sage-support : https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sage-support/QC9lPACXIcY/55AEp2mqX7EJ

Nathann

Attachments (1)

trac_14531.patch (787 bytes) - added by Nathann Cohen 9 years ago.

Download all attachments as: .zip

Change History (10)

Changed 9 years ago by Nathann Cohen

Attachment: trac_14531.patch added

comment:1 Changed 9 years ago by Nathann Cohen

Status: newneeds_review

comment:2 Changed 9 years ago by Leif Leonhardy

Component: linear programminglinear algebra
Reviewers: Leif Leonhardy
Status: needs_reviewpositive_review

Hahahahahaha

comment:3 Changed 9 years ago by Leif Leonhardy

Component: linear algebralinear programming

Ooops...

P.S.: Applies clean to Sage 5.10.beta1.

comment:4 in reply to:  2 Changed 9 years ago by Nathann Cohen

Hahahahahaha

Yeah. Totally :-D

Nathann

comment:5 Changed 9 years ago by Leif Leonhardy

And the winner is:

#14393 ("Clean up module_list.py to enforce and normalize the use of SAGE_INC over" )

  • module_list.py

    diff --git a/module_list.py b/module_list.py
    a b  
    66from sage.env import *
    77
    88SAGE_INC = os.path.join(SAGE_LOCAL, 'include')
    9 # this is needed until someone fixes the usage of SAGE_INC in this file
    10 SAGE_INC += '/'
    119
    1210#########################################################
    1311### BLAS setup

:-)

comment:6 Changed 9 years ago by Nathann Cohen

Well, at least gurobi was the only one missing. Of course it could only have happened to optional spkg !

Thanks for the review ! :-)

Nathann

comment:7 Changed 9 years ago by François Bissey

Well, sorry about that. I really thought I had everything.

comment:8 in reply to:  7 Changed 9 years ago by Leif Leonhardy

Replying to fbissey:

Well, sorry about that. I really thought I had everything.

Never mind. Just one more indication we should test optional spkgs more regularly, e.g. when a release candidate gets out.

comment:9 Changed 9 years ago by Jeroen Demeyer

Merged in: sage-5.10.beta2
Resolution: fixed
Status: positive_reviewclosed
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.