sage-5.9.rc1 released

[Jeroen Demeyer]

Dear Sage lovers,

We're releasing Sage 5.9.rc1.

Source archive:

http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/release/sage-5.9.rc1/sage-5.9.rc1.tar

Upgrade path:

http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/release/sage-5.9.rc1/sage-5.9.rc1/

The source and upgrade path can also be found on the mirror network
(you might need to wait a while before the mirrors are synchronized):

http://www.sagemath.org/download-latest.html


Please build, test, and report! We'd love to hear about your
experiences with this release.

== Notes ==

The merger script has been updated to no longer rewrite the
Mercurial history. As a consequence, upgrading from development
versions of Sage (starting with sage-5.9.beta2) should now work
properly. Upgrading from any stable version >= 4.5 should work as
before.

== Tickets ==

* We closed 197 tickets in this release. For details, see

http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/release/sage-5.9.rc1/tickets.html

Closed tickets:

#6984: cygwin port: make lapack into a dummy spkg that requires
systemwide lapack [Reviewed by Karl-Dieter Crisman]
#9520: scipy_sandbox does not exit if there are build failures, but
spkg-install looks OK [Reviewed by Karl-Dieter Crisman]
#10259: success error code returned when spkg install fails [Reviewed by
Karl-Dieter Crisman]
#12054: crash in digraph.py [Reviewed by Nathann Cohen]
#12622: Jason Grout: cliquer memory leaks [Reviewed by David Coudert,
Nathann Cohen]
#13666: openssl as a default package [Reviewed by Jeroen Demeyer]
#14450: MPIR build is broken on arm with ubuntu raring [Reviewed by
Jean-Pierre Flori, Julien Puydt]

Merged in sage-5.9.rc1:

#14031: Dmitrii Pasechnik, Jean-Pierre Flori: provide proper cygwin
rebasing scripts [Reviewed by Jean-Pierre Flori, Karl-Dieter Crisman]
#14465: Jean-Pierre Flori: Clean source.rst and include instructions for
Cygwin [Reviewed by Karl-Dieter Crisman, Jeroen Demeyer]
#14495: Jeroen Demeyer: Improvement to --optional doctests [Reviewed by
Volker Braun]

[Justin C. Walker]

On Apr 29, 2013, at 04:22 , Jeroen Demeyer wrote:

> Dear Sage lovers,
>
> We're releasing Sage 5.9.rc1.
>
> Source archive:
>
> http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/release/sage-5.9.rc1/sage-5.9.rc1.tar

Built (from scratch) w/o problems on two Mac OS X systems (10.6.8/Dual 6-core Xeons, 10.8.2/Quad-core Core i7), and all tests ('ptestlong') passed on each system!

Justin

--
Justin C. Walker, Curmudgeon-At-Large
Institute for the Enhancement of the Director's Income
--------
Experience is what you get
when you don't get what you want.
--------

[leif]

Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> Dear Sage lovers,
>
> We're releasing Sage 5.9.rc1.
>
> Source archive:
>
> http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/release/sage-5.9.rc1/sage-5.9.rc1.tar
>
> Upgrade path:
>
> http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/release/sage-5.9.rc1/sage-5.9.rc1/
>
> The source and upgrade path can also be found on the mirror network
> (you might need to wait a while before the mirrors are synchronized):
>
> http://www.sagemath.org/download-latest.html
>
>
> Please build, test, and report! We'd love to hear about your
> experiences with this release.
>
> == Notes ==
>
> The merger script has been updated to no longer rewrite the
> Mercurial history. As a consequence, upgrading from development
> versions of Sage (starting with sage-5.9.beta2) should now work
> properly. Upgrading from any stable version >= 4.5 should work as
> before.

FWIW, when trying to upgrade (from rc0), I (still) get

Downloading packages from
'http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/release/sage-5.9.rc1/sage-5.9.rc1//spkg'.
Reading package lists... Done!
The following packages will be upgraded:

extcode-5.9.rc1 gcc-4.7.2.p1 sage-5.9.rc1 sage_root-5.9.rc1
sage_scripts-5.9.rc1

...


until I

$ touch spkg/installed/gcc-4.7.2.p1

(After doing that, the GCC spkg vanishes from the list.)


-leif

--
() The ASCII Ribbon Campaign
/\ Help Cure HTML E-Mail

[leif]

... but that(?) also triggered the rebuild of a couple of spkgs, in
build order (including those that really got upgraded):

sage_root-5.9.rc1
lapack-20071123.p2
atlas-3.8.4.p1
sage_scripts-5.9.rc1
gsl-1.15.p1
iml-1.0.1.p14
fflas_ffpack-1.6.0.p0
linbox-1.3.2.p0
numpy-1.5.1.p1
ppl-0.11.2.p1
sage-5.9.rc1
conway_polynomials-0.4.p0
matplotlib-1.1.0
cvxopt-1.1.5.p0
elliptic_curves-0.7
extcode-5.9.rc1
gfan-0.5.p0
graphs-20120404.p4
polytopes_db-20100210.p2
r-2.15.2.p2
rpy2-2.0.8.p0
scipy-0.11.0.p1
sagetex-2.3.4


IMHO pretty weird, since no spkgs other than sage, sage_root,
sage_scripts and extcode changed from rc0 to rc1. Or am I missing
something?

[Jeroen Demeyer]

On 04/30/2013 03:14 AM, leif wrote:
> IMHO pretty weird, since no spkgs other than sage, sage_root,
> sage_scripts and extcode changed from rc0 to rc1.

True, but some packages (indirectly) depend on sage or sage_root. This
is to support upgrades from old (< 5.0) versions of Sage.

[kcrisman]

Just wondering about upgrades... I upgraded from rc0 to rc1 and get

$ sage

----------------------------------------------------------------------

| Sage Version 5.9.rc0, Release Date: 2013-04-25                     |

| Type "notebook()" for the browser-based notebook interface.        |

| Type "help()" for help.                                            |

----------------------------------------------------------------------

**********************************************************************

*                                                                    *

* Warning: this is a prerelease version, and it may be unstable.     *

*                                                                    *

**********************************************************************

sage: version()

'Sage Version 5.9.rc1, Release Date: 2013-04-29'

sage: 

Is that typical (the mismatch), or a regression?  We should probably have some test that banner and version match.

[leif]

kcrisman wrote:
> Just wondering about upgrades... I upgraded from rc0 to rc1 and get
>
> $ sage
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> | Sage Version 5.9.rc0, Release Date: 2013-04-25 |
> | Type "notebook()" for the browser-based notebook interface. |
> | Type "help()" for help. |
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> **********************************************************************
> * *
> * Warning: this is a prerelease version, and it may be unstable. *
> * *
> **********************************************************************
> sage: version()
> 'Sage Version 5.9.rc1, Release Date: 2013-04-29'
> sage:
>
> Is that typical (the mismatch), or a regression? We should probably
> have some test that banner and version match.

I do get the (almost) correct version in the banner, but it now no
longer shows that this is an upgraded version.

I'm pretty sure it did say "Sage version 5.9.rc1, upgraded from ..." /at
some point/^TM ...


-leif

>
> On Tuesday, April 30, 2013 5:01:11 AM UTC-4, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> On 04/30/2013 03:14 AM, leif wrote:
> > IMHO pretty weird, since no spkgs other than sage, sage_root,
> > sage_scripts and extcode changed from rc0 to rc1.
> True, but some packages (indirectly) depend on sage or sage_root. This
> is to support upgrades from old (< 5.0) versions of Sage.