On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 23:45, David Cournapeau wrote:
> Since I am not an egg user myself, I wonder whether it would be useful
> to make numpy zip-safe ? Can it be done without numpy relying on
> setuptools, or do we have to use setuptools for pkg_resources (maybe
> pkg_resources can be used wit
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Robert Kern wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 23:37, David Cournapeau wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 4:23 PM, Robert Kern wrote:
>>
>>> I think it will try to collect all of the possibilities by looking at
>>> PyPI and the download link, then decide on the best
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 23:37, David Cournapeau wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 4:23 PM, Robert Kern wrote:
>
>> I think it will try to collect all of the possibilities by looking at
>> PyPI and the download link, then decide on the best one. But it could
>> be that if there are files on PyPI, i
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 4:23 PM, Robert Kern wrote:
>
> I think it will try to collect all of the possibilities by looking at
> PyPI and the download link, then decide on the best one. But it could
> be that if there are files on PyPI, it will only consider those. I
> don't know.
I ended up push
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 7:43 PM, David Cournapeau wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 12:25 AM, David Cournapeau
> wrote:
> >> We need to be able to run both projects concurrently on the same grid.
> >> Setuptools + eggs allows this to happen. If we used .exe installers then
> >> we could only have
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 12:25 AM, David Cournapeau wrote:
>> We need to be able to run both projects concurrently on the same grid.
>> Setuptools + eggs allows this to happen. If we used .exe installers then
>> we could only have one single version of any given dependancy at any
>> time and so we
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 4:55 AM, Russell E. Owen wrote:
> Does anyone have a binary installer for numpy 1.3.0 and Python 2.6?
>
> I've been able to install from source and all tests passed, but I prefer
> official binaries because I have some confidence that there are no
> hidden dependencies (imp
Does anyone have a binary installer for numpy 1.3.0 and Python 2.6?
I've been able to install from source and all tests passed, but I prefer
official binaries because I have some confidence that there are no
hidden dependencies (important for distributing self-contained apps).
I tried to build
Thanks, Chris -- I fixed it in trunk. This is the kind of check we
should be running on the buildbot.
Regards
Stéfan
2009/4/16 Christopher Hanley :
> Hi,
>
> Our nightly build system has been detecting tabs in the recent versions
> of numpy. The following files appear to have issues:
>
> Checke
Hi,
Our nightly build system has been detecting tabs in the recent versions
of numpy. The following files appear to have issues:
Checked out revision 6870.
svn checkout ok
PYTHON FILES INDENTED WITH TABS:
./numpy/numpy/distutils/fcompiler/compaq.py
./numpy/numpy/distutils/command/build_ext.py
.
if you built numpy from source with a site.cfg file pointing to you atlas
libraries, numpy.dot() will use that library natively. no need to import
_dotblas.
Chris
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 6:16 PM, Mathew Yeates wrote:
> Hi
> The line
> from _dotblas import dot . is giving me an import error
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:50 PM, Fadhley Salim
wrote:
> I just installed the latest stable mingw, and made sure that the mingw
> bin directory is in my PATH. I used the command you suggested and got
> the following output:
>
> http://pastebin.com/m4aea512c
Could you make sure to remove entirely
> We need to be able to run both projects concurrently on the same grid.
> Setuptools + eggs allows this to happen. If we used .exe installers then
> we could only have one single version of any given dependancy at any
> time and so we would not be able to run the two projects in paralell.
I think
Eggs are still beneficial:
* People who do not have access to PyPi can still use it (think banks)
* If you can build eggs easily then so can people like me... it becomes
easy to produce optimized eggs for all our Xeon processors.
* Deploying an egg is nothing more than copying a file to the relev
As I said before we have a very big set up. The problem is not the
difficulty in making eggs. Eggs are very easy things to make if you can
make the C++ compile first.
Setuptools is a very good and stable project whose purpose is to help
automate very large deployments of Python dependancies. Your
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 12:12 AM, Fadhley Salim
wrote:
> I agree with Robert
>
> There should be no reason on earth why you cannot use an Egg to package
> Numpy.
Actually, there is, although it is not really an egg deficiency. We
use ATLAS as blas/lapack, and ATLAS binaries are tuned for one
arch
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 12:10 AM, wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:03 AM, Fadhley Salim
> wrote:
>> No joy yet - this time a completely different error. I just tried r6871 and
>> r6872...
>>
>> http://pastebin.com/d4d240b36
>
> do you have g77 included in mingw and on your path?
g77 should n
I agree with Robert
There should be no reason on earth why you cannot use an Egg to package
Numpy. Setuptools is not fragile, it's very stable but requires a bit of
understanding.
The problem I have is not packaging numpy but compiling it on Windows.
If I could compile the C I'd have built the eg
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:03 AM, Fadhley Salim
wrote:
> No joy yet - this time a completely different error. I just tried r6871 and
> r6872...
>
> http://pastebin.com/d4d240b36
do you have g77 included in mingw and on your path?
Josef
___
Numpy-discus
No joy yet - this time a completely different error. I just tried r6871
and r6872...
http://pastebin.com/d4d240b36
From: numpy-discussion-boun...@scipy.org
[mailto:numpy-discussion-boun...@scipy.org] On Behalf Of Charles R
Harris
Sent: 16 April 2009 02:28
To: Di
I just installed the latest stable mingw, and made sure that the mingw
bin directory is in my PATH. I used the command you suggested and got
the following output:
http://pastebin.com/m4aea512c
Any suggestions as to what I might be doing wrong?
I'm using standard cpython 2.4.4 from Python.org
-
On 4/16/2009 5:06 AM dmitrey apparently wrote:
> I have orthonormal set of vectors B = [b_0, b_1,..., b_k-1],
> b_i from R^n (k may be less than n), and vector a from R^n
>
> What is most efficient way in numpy to get r from R^n and c_0, ...,
> c_k-1 from R:
> a = c_0*b_0+...+c_k-1*b_k-1 + r
> (r
Hi all,
I have orthonormal set of vectors B = [b_0, b_1,..., b_k-1],
b_i from R^n (k may be less than n), and vector a from R^n
What is most efficient way in numpy to get r from R^n and c_0, ...,
c_k-1 from R:
a = c_0*b_0+...+c_k-1*b_k-1 + r
(r is rest)
Thank you in advance, D.
_
Hi all,
I have orthonormal set of vectors B = [b_0, b_1,..., b_k-1],
b_i from R^n (k may be less than n), and vector a from R^n
What is most efficient way in numpy to get r from R^n and c_0, ...,
c_k-1 from R:
a = c_0*b_0+...+c_k-1*b_k-1 + r
(r is rest)
Thank you in advance, D.
_
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 02:02, David Cournapeau
wrote:
> Robert Kern wrote:
>>
>> easy_install is documented to be able to find and convert a
>> bdist_wininst .exe on the fly, so I believe that should be sufficient.
>
> Yes, I've tried locally on a bdist_wininst exe, and easy_install could
> insta
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 04:02:01PM +0900, David Cournapeau wrote:
> What about just pushing the non optimized bdist_wininst installer on
> pypi ?
With a clear note saying that they are non optimised.
G.
___
Numpy-discussion mailing list
Numpy-discussion
Robert Kern wrote:
>
> easy_install is documented to be able to find and convert a
> bdist_wininst .exe on the fly, so I believe that should be sufficient.
>
Yes, I've tried locally on a bdist_wininst exe, and easy_install could
install it. I have not tested it from the network.
> It might be
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 01:52, David Cournapeau
wrote:
> David Cournapeau wrote:
>> Robert Kern wrote:
>>
>>> I have found that people are more willing to accept that they have to
>>> do something different to get a technically chalenging feature (i.e.
>>> use a particular installer to get a safe,
David Cournapeau wrote:
> Robert Kern wrote:
>
>> I have found that people are more willing to accept that they have to
>> do something different to get a technically chalenging feature (i.e.
>> use a particular installer to get a safe, optimized BLAS) than to
>> accept that a relatively straigh
Robert Kern wrote:
>
> I have found that people are more willing to accept that they have to
> do something different to get a technically chalenging feature (i.e.
> use a particular installer to get a safe, optimized BLAS) than to
> accept that a relatively straightforward feature is not available
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 12:50:59AM -0500, Robert Kern wrote:
> > PEAK's setuptools is fragile with complex packages. This is the core
> > reason numpy is not distributed as an egg, as the implications on what
> > numpy would have to do to 'fit' in an egg compromise numpy's instal
> > quality (read:
31 matches
Mail list logo
