Package Details: macaulay2 19030.995c6fd8c-1

Git Clone URL: (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: macaulay2
Description: Software system for algebraic geometry and commutative algebra
Upstream URL:
Licenses: GPL
Submitter: remyoudompheng
Maintainer: ConnorBehan
Last Packager: ConnorBehan
Votes: 5
Popularity: 0.000000
First Submitted: 2009-04-09 17:09
Last Updated: 2021-05-21 16:12

Latest Comments

1 2 3 4 5 6 Next › Last »

DanGrayson commented on 2021-07-22 12:29

Re: "Is there any reason for having singular-factory as a dependency and not singular?"

Presumably both provide the factory library and M2 can find it in both cases, so it shouldn't matter from that point of view.

Ideally singular would have been packaged so it gets factory from the package singular-factory, so there would be no conflict. That would be good to change, because singular-factory is lighter weight, and it doesn't make sense for singular to be a dependency of macaulay2.

feynhat commented on 2021-07-22 08:10

singular-factory clashes with singular. If I have singular already installed and I remove singular-factory as a dependency from M2's PKGBUILD, then M2 builds just fine.

Is there any reason for having singular-factory as a dependency and not singular?

Dylan14 commented on 2021-07-18 18:49

It should be noted in the PKGBUILD that this conflicts with the givaro package in the repository.

Dylan14 commented on 2021-05-21 13:34

gcc10 needs to be added as a make dependency, as one of the dependencies that Macaulay downloads when it is building, mathicgb, fails to build under gcc 11.1 (see the following issue: There is a pending pull request to fix this:

DanGrayson commented on 2021-04-02 18:50

Re: "I've heard that one dependency is no longer needed"

They seem to be referring to "frobby", but Macaulay2 still requires it.

micwoj92 commented on 2021-04-02 18:29

Hello, could you either switch to use tags or reupload this as -git package? Also I've heard that one dependency is no longer needed

8d1h commented on 2021-03-07 15:42

That's great, thanks a lot! Glad I could help.

DanGrayson commented on 2021-03-07 14:04

Oh, right. I've just checked, and our configuration files do not use those two variables, so it's safe for you to remove those lines. I've also checked that autoconf 2.69, which we use, sets them, but autoconf 2.71, which you use, does not. So I've removed those lines in our development branch (see below) and will upgrade the configure script to work well with 2.71 (currently it gets lots of warnings).

commit ffd0589f33e9b95b306720597ba831fcd93be679 (HEAD -> development, upstream/development) Author: Daniel R. Grayson Date: Sun Mar 7 07:50:21 2021 -0600

remove obsolete configure variables from include/

..., namely CXXCPP and EGREP.  They were produced by autoconf 2.69 but not by autoconf 2.71.

Thanks for drawing my attention to this.

8d1h commented on 2021-03-07 01:28

From "include/configuration". I first ran configure in the "M2" directory, removed the lines, and then ran make again and it worked. I guess that this is generated from the template file "include/" and somehow these two didn't get replaced?

DanGrayson commented on 2021-03-06 18:48

Which file did you remove those lines from?