On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 6:22 PM, David Cournapeau wrote:
> Ok, so I've looked a bit into it tonight:
>
> - used mingw-w64 4.8.1 (32 bits host)
> - openblas binaries available on the official website (seem to be built
> with mingw w64)
> - used -static-libgcc, -static-libstdc++ and -static-libgf
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 8:22 PM, David Cournapeau wrote:
> Ok, so I've looked a bit into it tonight:
>
> - used mingw-w64 4.8.1 (32 bits host)
> - openblas binaries available on the official website (seem to be built
> with mingw w64)
> - used -static-libgcc, -static-libstdc++ and -static-libgf
Ok, so I've looked a bit into it tonight:
- used mingw-w64 4.8.1 (32 bits host)
- openblas binaries available on the official website (seem to be built
with mingw w64)
- used -static-libgcc, -static-libstdc++ and -static-libgfortran
- building numpy went ok, test suite almost passes, nothing t
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 10:05 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 8:15 PM, Peter Cock
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> >>
> >> Why not just release numpy 1.8 with the old and terrible system? As
> >> you know I'm 110% in favor of getting ri
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 12:31 PM, David Cournapeau wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Charles R Harris <
> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 12:12 PM, David Cournapeau wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Charles R Harris <
>
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 12:15 PM, Peter Cock wrote:
> Doing that right is important not just for SciPy but for any
> other downstream package including C code compiled
> against the NumPy C API (and the people doing this
> probably will only have access to free compilers).
>
>
well, "free as in be
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 6:31 AM, William Ray Wing wrote:
> If you will forgive an observation from a Mac user and (amateur)
> developer. I have twice tried to build Numpy from source and both times
> failed. The problem was that I couldn't find a single comprehensive set of
> directions that st
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 2:56 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> Another question is, can we start distributing wheels yet?
>
yes, yes, yes -- though maybe not for the beta testing.
wheels will never catch on , or even get debugged if none of us use them.
-Chris
--
Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
Ocea
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 7:01 PM, Russell E. Owen wrote:
> In article
> ,
> Ralf Gommers wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 2:45 AM, wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Charles R Harris
> > > wrote:
> > > > Hi All,
> > > >
> > > > Numpy 1.8 is about ready for an rc1, which brin
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 8:15 PM, Peter Cock wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>>
>> Why not just release numpy 1.8 with the old and terrible system? As
>> you know I'm 110% in favor of getting rid of it, but 1.8 is ready to
>> go and 1.9 is coming soon enough, and t
In article
,
Ralf Gommers wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 2:45 AM, wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Charles R Harris
> > wrote:
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > Numpy 1.8 is about ready for an rc1, which brings up the question of
> > which
> > > binary builds so put up on sourceforge.
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Charles R Harris wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 12:12 PM, David Cournapeau wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Charles R Harris <
>> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> New summary
>>>
>>>1. 32 bit windows, python 2.6, 2.7, 3.2,
On Sep 16, 2013, at 1:54 PM, Pauli Virtanen wrote:
> 16.09.2013 16:31, William Ray Wing kirjoitti:
> [clip]
>> If you will forgive an observation from a Mac user and (amateur) developer.
>> I have twice tried to build Numpy from source and both times failed.
>> The problem was that I couldn't fin
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 12:31 PM, David Cournapeau wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Charles R Harris <
> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 12:12 PM, David Cournapeau wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Charles R Harris <
>
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>
> Why not just release numpy 1.8 with the old and terrible system? As
> you know I'm 110% in favor of getting rid of it, but 1.8 is ready to
> go and 1.9 is coming soon enough, and the old and terrible system does
> work right now, today. N
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
> > New summary
> >
> > 32 bit windows, python 2.6, 2.7, 3.2, 3.3, compiled with MSVC
> > 64 bit windows, python 2.6, 2.7, 3.2, 3.3, compiled with MSVC, linked
> with
> > MKL
> >
In article <8e95a257-3f06-43b7-8407-95916d284...@mac.com>,
William Ray Wing wrote:
> On Sep 15, 2013, at 9:04 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Numpy 1.8 is about ready for an rc1, which brings up the question of which
> > binary builds so put up on sourceforge. For Window
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
> New summary
>
> 32 bit windows, python 2.6, 2.7, 3.2, 3.3, compiled with MSVC
> 64 bit windows, python 2.6, 2.7, 3.2, 3.3, compiled with MSVC, linked with
> MKL
>
> These should be good for both windows 7 and window 8.
>
> For Mac there is
New summary
1. 32 bit windows, python 2.6, 2.7, 3.2, 3.3, compiled with MSVC
2. 64 bit windows, python 2.6, 2.7, 3.2, 3.3, compiled with MSVC, linked
with MKL
These should be good for both windows 7 and window 8.
For Mac there is first the question of OS X versions, (10.5?), 10.6, 10.7,
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 12:12 PM, David Cournapeau wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Charles R Harris <
> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> New summary
>>
>>1. 32 bit windows, python 2.6, 2.7, 3.2, 3.3, compiled with MSVC
>>2. 64 bit windows, python 2.6, 2.7, 3.2, 3.3, c
16.09.2013 16:31, William Ray Wing kirjoitti:
[clip]
> If you will forgive an observation from a Mac user and (amateur) developer.
> I have twice tried to build Numpy from source and both times failed.
> The problem was that I couldn't find a single comprehensive set of
> directions that started fr
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Charles R Harris wrote:
> New summary
>
>1. 32 bit windows, python 2.6, 2.7, 3.2, 3.3, compiled with MSVC
>2. 64 bit windows, python 2.6, 2.7, 3.2, 3.3, compiled with MSVC,
>linked with MKL
>
> These should be good for both windows 7 and window 8.
>
>
On Sep 15, 2013, at 9:04 PM, Charles R Harris wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Numpy 1.8 is about ready for an rc1, which brings up the question of which
> binary builds so put up on sourceforge. For Windows maybe
[byte]
> For Mac there is first the question of OS X versions, (10.5?), 10.6,
> 10
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Numpy 1.8 is about ready for an rc1, which brings up the question of
> which
> > binary builds so put up on sourceforge. For Windows maybe
> >
> > 32 bit wind
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 10:49 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 7:10 AM, Ralf Gommers
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 2:45 AM, wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Charles R Harris
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi All,
> >> >
> >> > Numpy 1.8 is about ready for an rc1
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Numpy 1.8 is about ready for an rc1, which brings up the question of which
> binary builds so put up on sourceforge. For Windows maybe
>
> 32 bit windows, python 2.6, 2.7, 3.2, 3.3, compiled with MSVC
> 64 bit windows, python 2
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 7:10 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 2:45 AM, wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Charles R Harris
>> wrote:
>> > Hi All,
>> >
>> > Numpy 1.8 is about ready for an rc1, which brings up the question of
>> > which
>> > binary builds so put up on
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 2:45 AM, wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Numpy 1.8 is about ready for an rc1, which brings up the question of
> which
> > binary builds so put up on sourceforge. For Windows maybe
> >
> > 32 bit windows, python 2.6,
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Numpy 1.8 is about ready for an rc1, which brings up the question of which
> binary builds so put up on sourceforge. For Windows maybe
>
> 32 bit windows, python 2.6, 2.7, 3.2, 3.3, compiled with MSVC
> 64 bit windows, python 2
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Shahrokh Mortazavi <
smor...@exchange.microsoft.com> wrote:
> hi chuck,
>
> this is shahrokh mortazavi from microsoft (proj lead on PTVS
> http://pytools.codeplex.com .
>
> 1. 1st - thank you and everyone else involved for helping creating,
> maintain & deliver
discussion
Subject: [Numpy-discussion] Binary releases
Hi All,
Numpy 1.8 is about ready for an rc1, which brings up the question of which
binary builds so put up on sourceforge. For Windows maybe
1. 32 bit windows, python 2.6, 2.7, 3.2, 3.3, compiled with MSVC
2. 64 bit windows, python
Hi All,
Numpy 1.8 is about ready for an rc1, which brings up the question of which
binary builds so put up on sourceforge. For Windows maybe
1. 32 bit windows, python 2.6, 2.7, 3.2, 3.3, compiled with MSVC
2. 64 bit windows, python 2.6, 2.7, 3.2, 3.3, compiled with MSVC, linked
with MKL
32 matches
Mail list logo
