#22675 closed enhancement (fixed)

Upgrade PARI to version 2.9.2

Reported by: jdemeyer Owned by:
Priority: major Milestone: sage-8.0
Component: packages: standard Keywords:
Cc: embray, fbissey, vdelecroix, defeo Merged in:
Authors: Jeroen Demeyer Reviewers: Vincent Delecroix
Report Upstream: N/A Work issues:
Branch: 543c4a1 (Commits) Commit: 543c4a1889f21b35483b0bf45e7dbcdb6ce25582
Dependencies: #22633 Stopgaps:

Description (last modified by jdemeyer)

PARI just released version 2.9.2. This will likely fix #22279.

Also a new patch is added to fix #22635.

Tarball: https://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/pub/pari/unix/pari-2.9.2.tar.gz

Change History (21)

comment:1 Changed 18 months ago by jdemeyer

  • Description modified (diff)

comment:2 Changed 18 months ago by jdemeyer

  • Branch set to u/jdemeyer/upgrade_pari_to_version_2_9_2

comment:3 Changed 18 months ago by fbissey

  • Cc fbissey added
  • Commit set to d30f4d249c400e4830a877595f7281ce61f3f164

New commits:

d30f4d2Upgrade PARI to version 2.9.2

comment:4 follow-up: Changed 18 months ago by embray

I'm not sure but this might also fix #22635 if that gets incorporated into the final release.

The fix to #22633 is still held up for some reason, even though it has nothing directly to do with the concerns about emscripten.

comment:5 in reply to: ↑ 4 Changed 18 months ago by jdemeyer

Replying to embray:

The fix to #22633 is still held up for some reason, even though it has nothing directly to do with the concerns about emscripten.

#22633 will certainly not be fixed in 2.9.2 because my PROT_NONE patches are not in 2.9.2 either.

comment:6 Changed 18 months ago by embray

Okay, I thought that might be the case since there was still some question about it.

comment:7 Changed 18 months ago by jdemeyer

  • Dependencies set to #22633

comment:8 Changed 18 months ago by jdemeyer

  • Description modified (diff)

comment:9 Changed 18 months ago by git

  • Commit changed from d30f4d249c400e4830a877595f7281ce61f3f164 to 543c4a1889f21b35483b0bf45e7dbcdb6ce25582

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. New commits:

343f241mmap() PARI stack with MAP_NORESERVE (for Cygwin)
543c4a1Upgrade PARI to version 2.9.2

comment:10 Changed 18 months ago by jdemeyer

  • Status changed from new to needs_review

comment:11 Changed 17 months ago by jdemeyer

  • Cc vdelecroix defeo added

Ping...

comment:12 follow-up: Changed 17 months ago by vdelecroix

Apparently prot_none_4.patch is accepted upstream (seems to be d42061c). Are you sure it will be in a stable release?

comment:13 in reply to: ↑ 12 ; follow-up: Changed 17 months ago by jdemeyer

Replying to vdelecroix:

Apparently prot_none_4.patch is accepted upstream (seems to be d42061c). Are you sure it will be in a stable release?

  1. This ticket here does not deal with prot_none_4.patch so why does it matter?
  1. I cannot read the mind of the PARI developers, but I guess it will be in PARI 2.10

comment:14 in reply to: ↑ 13 Changed 17 months ago by vdelecroix

Replying to jdemeyer:

Replying to vdelecroix:

Apparently prot_none_4.patch is accepted upstream (seems to be d42061c). Are you sure it will be in a stable release?

  1. This ticket here does not deal with prot_none_4.patch so why does it matter?

prot_none_4.patch included with commit 343f241 is part of the branch.

  1. I cannot read the mind of the PARI developers, but I guess it will be in PARI 2.10

Of course not. But you can care about the future of your patches and ask to have it backported in stable releases.

comment:15 follow-up: Changed 17 months ago by vdelecroix

It is always a mess to attribute commit to dependencies... how am I supposed to deal with that?

comment:16 Changed 17 months ago by vdelecroix

Now, waiting for the testsuite...

comment:17 in reply to: ↑ 15 ; follow-up: Changed 17 months ago by jdemeyer

Replying to vdelecroix:

It is always a mess to attribute commit to dependencies... how am I supposed to deal with that?

I don't know what you are seeing. There is only one commit and it does not involve prot_none_4.patch.

comment:18 in reply to: ↑ 17 ; follow-up: Changed 17 months ago by vdelecroix

Replying to jdemeyer:

Replying to vdelecroix:

It is always a mess to attribute commit to dependencies... how am I supposed to deal with that?

I don't know what you are seeing. There is only one commit and it does not involve prot_none_4.patch.

There are two commits on u/jdemeyer/upgrade_pari_to_version_2_9_2 on top of 8.0.beta1

comment:19 in reply to: ↑ 18 Changed 17 months ago by jdemeyer

Replying to vdelecroix:

There are two commits on u/jdemeyer/upgrade_pari_to_version_2_9_2 on top of 8.0.beta1

Right. I understand what you mean now. I usually look at the branch on Trac and that shows only one commit.

Anyway, this review is only about https://git.sagemath.org/sage.git/commit/?h=543c4a1889f21b35483b0bf45e7dbcdb6ce25582

comment:20 Changed 17 months ago by vdelecroix

  • Reviewers set to Vincent Delecroix
  • Status changed from needs_review to positive_review

comment:21 Changed 17 months ago by vbraun

  • Branch changed from u/jdemeyer/upgrade_pari_to_version_2_9_2 to 543c4a1889f21b35483b0bf45e7dbcdb6ce25582
  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Status changed from positive_review to closed
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.