-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 529
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
upgrade to flint 2.6.3 #29719
Comments
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Branch: public/packages/flint260 |
Commit: |
comment:1
this is from the latest alpha2 (commit a960857c7d8e5ea7c4d4c2958e38ec52778d85d9) Patches still need to be sorted out. New commits:
|
Author: Dima Pasechnik |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. New commits:
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
comment:3
OK, can be tested now. All our patches got upstreamed, so they are gone now. |
comment:4
Neither arb 2.16 nor 2.17 work with this version of Flint. One gets
|
comment:5
One apparently may use arb patch: https://github.com/fredrik-johansson/arb/commit/d3d9983231e0f034e86a1e75761627eb8213b704.patch - trying this with arb 2.17.0 now. |
comment:6
Yes, there will be an immediate new Arb release. The current git master ought to work. |
comment:8
Replying to @fredrik-johansson:
there are doctest errors (I made https://github.com/dimpase/arb/releases/tag/2.17.1, and removed all the arb patches)
and
|
comment:9
OK, I ended up using arb patch: https://github.com/fredrik-johansson/arb/commit/d3d9983231e0f034e86a1e75761627eb8213b704.patch
|
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
comment:12
experiments tell that precision needs to be at least 25 for this example to run, i.e. this works:
|
comment:13
But this works:
So, apparently, some initialisation is missing, if C is created on the fly. |
comment:14
This is reproducible on the ticket branch, on Fedora 30 and on Debian 10.
but
segfaults. |
comment:15
Dima, thanks for reporting the Arb doctest failures. The slight regressions in accuracy for elliptic_pi, elliptic_pi_inc and elliptic_rj are due to using a different algorithm to compute the R_J function for certain complex parameters. The new algorithm is a bit slower and less accurate, but unlike the old algorithm always gives the right branch. These doctest results just need to be updated. Unfortunately, the new algorithm doesn't work when phi is an inexact multiple of pi/2, leading to the NaN values. There is a workaround: acb_elliptic_pi_inc takes a pi flag to multiply the argument by pi exactly, so if you add a pi flag to the Sage wrapper and pass in phi=0.5 with pi=True in the doctest, it should give the expected result. It's theoretically possible to fix these regressions, and I will open an Arb issue for it, but I'm not keen to spend time on it any time soon. The other two examples look correct: converting an Arb number to an MPFR now rounds according to MPFR semantics (including rounding to infinity) instead of abort()ing when the exponents are out of range for MPFR. |
comment:16
This works too:
That is, apparently, some kind of Flint initialisation needs to happen before |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. New commits:
|
comment:129
rebased over 9.2.rc3 |
Work Issues: rebase on top of #30805 |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. New commits:
|
comment:132
rebased over #30805 |
comment:133
To build the current version of this branch (commit 01271cb) on Ubuntu I had to I don't think that's listed as a build requirement. |
comment:134
Logs please |
Attachment: flint-2.6.3.log Build attempt on commit 01271cb |
comment:135
I attached a log file. There's really not much to see - a bunch of failed downloads because flint 2.6.3 isn't in any of the Sage mirrors yet, then a compile failure because it couldn't find "gmp.h", which I resolved with |
comment:136
Replying to @BrentBaccala:
look at what |
comment:137
Replying to @dimpase:
I had to re-run configure after installing libgmp-dev, and I didn't keep the old log, but I don't remember any glaring complaints. Furthermore, I found this in the (new) config.log: configure:37965: result: gmp-6.1.2: using system package; SPKG will not be installed I infer from this that a SPKG is available and should have been used by the original build. I don't know enough about Sage packaging to know how a SPKG gmp should be used by flint. |
comment:138
Replying to @BrentBaccala:
How did you start the build? I only can see this happening on an unconfigured tree if one does not start by |
comment:139
Replying to @dimpase:
After |
comment:140
could be stale leftovers - how about |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. New commits:
|
comment:142
rebased over 9.3.beta0, squashed few things. Let us get this in please! In particular, here are patches that need to fix doctest on distros that ship flint 2.6.3 already, e.g. Homebrew, Ubuntu 20.10. |
Changed work issues from rebase on top of #30805 to none |
Changed branch from public/packages/flint260 to |
Flint 2.6.3 has been released
tarball: see checksums.ini [upstream_url]
Depends on #30805
Upstream: Reported upstream. Developers acknowledge bug.
CC: @timokau @kedlaya @jbalakrishnan @saraedum @isuruf @mkoeppe @kliem @videlec @w-bruns @slel
Component: packages: standard
Keywords: upgrade
Author: Dima Pasechnik, Matthias Koeppe
Branch/Commit:
7681b1a
Reviewer: Matthias Koeppe, Dima Pasechnik
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/29719
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: