On Sun, 2012-09-16 at 09:13 -0400, Suvayu Ali wrote: > Hello everyone, > > First, thank you for your thoughts and suggestions. > > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 01:14:42PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 09:59:40AM -0500, Richard Shaw wrote: > > > Ick... This thing (sage) is a mess of bundled libraries you'll > > > definitely need to manage your own install. This looks to be a ton of > > > work to unbundle all the libraries if someone wanted to package it > > > officially. > > > > There was some work on packaging it for Fedora a few years ago; not sure > > offhand where that went. A fundamental issue, as you've noticed, is that > > Sage is more a software *distribution* itself than it is an appliction. > > This doesn't lend itself well to packaging. > > > > At the moment I am short on time, so cannot experiment with sage. That > said, Fedora has a long standing packaging effort for SAGE[1]. It seems > to me sage needs a TeXLive-like distribution model to be not so > intimidating for new users. This however does not make the effort > required to include it in Linux distribution respositories any simpler. > > I'll try compiling my own in a few weeks when I have some more time and > report back. I have built Sage on Fedora 17 and RHEL 6 with no difficulty. It is a big ugly package, but it is self contained. It would be nice to have a package setup like TeXLive, but I have seen the discussions about the challenges involved. > > Cheers, > > > Footnotes: > > [1] <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/SciTech/SAGE> > > -- Matthew Saltzman Clemson University Math Sciences mjs AT clemson DOT edu -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
