[QUOTE=Brian Gladman;204934]Hi Guys,

If you are going to backport it to an earlier version of Python, could one of you decide who is going to maintain it as I won't be able to do this.

In fact my development version is python 3 and when python 2.7 is released not even 2.6 will work as I need something in 2.7 and 3.1 (ordered dictionaries).

Brian[/QUOTE]Not me, sorry. If I'm to support anything, for the benefit of the non-Windoze people, it will be the Perl version.

Paul

[quote=xilman;204949]Not me, sorry. If I'm to support anything, for the benefit of the non-Windoze people, it will be the Perl version.

Paul[/quote]
In that case, would it be better to update the Perl version to meet Brian's Python script, than to rewrite Brian's Python script to work?

[quote=henryzz;204947]Are you saying you won't be able to run our backport?
I am sure the people who make the backport will be willing to maintain the backport part of the code if needbe.[/quote]

If you backport to 2.4, I am not sure it will run on 2.6. It depends on how you do it - I have managed to get common code for 2.6, 2.7 and 3.1 but it was hard work.

Since I already have several versions of Python installed, I really don't want yet more.

Brain

I just had a thought...I've heard of something called perl2exe before which lets you convert Perl programs into standalone Windows executables. I wonder if there's anything similar for Python? That could prove useful for for making factmsieve.py work on computers without a new enough version of Python. (Of course, I have absolutely no idea whether such a thing exists. Probably not. :rolleyes:)

[quote=mdettweiler;204967]I just had a thought...I've heard of something called perl2exe before which lets you convert Perl programs into standalone Windows executables. I wonder if there's anything similar for Python? That could prove useful for for making factmsieve.py work on computers without a new enough version of Python. (Of course, I have absolutely no idea whether such a thing exists. Probably not. :rolleyes:)[/quote]
Hey, looky, I did find something after all. I eat my words about there probably not being any such thing in existence. :smile:

[URL]http://www.py2exe.org/[/URL]

This appears to be just for Windows, though, so while it would be helpful for that, it wouldn't be any help to Linux users with an older version of Python.

I have actually had some success in my CD/USB project with running the current (0.51) script, finally. But, it wasn't by rewriting anything. I obtained the source package for Python 2.6.4 and was successful in compiling it. I did not install it, so it currently resides and is called from its original directory. I did have to bear through some glitches along the way - most notably zlib did not appear at first. To compound the trouble. I had to install zlib1g-dev (yeah, like that was intuitive!) via the system "Synaptic Package Manager." Of course, that wouldn't work at first either, because of a mismatched dependency, causing me to have to rework all the repositories.

Anyway, I am running the unaltered factmsieve.py script now, under Python 2.6 without actually installing it in the system. So, this may be an option for those running linux that don't want to actually install a version of Python that's above the system installed one.

Take Care,
Ed

Suppose that someone wants to run factmsieve.py using Brian's script and GGNFS/Msieve suite.

Suppose that the same someone has a CUDA enabled graphic card.

Should he run polynomial selection with "[FONT="Courier New"]msieve -g 0[/FONT]", and then copy the .fb file to the /example directory and simply run factmsieve.py example[.fb] ?

Luigi

[quote=xilman;204777]Brian: do you have an easily-digestible list of the architectural differences between your Python script and the Perl script from which it was developed?

I ask because I have access to a rather nice RedHat EL5 system but that version of RH has only Python 2.4 and your script requires a later version. It can't easily be upgraded (it's not my system for a start) and, unlike you, I find Perl rather more portable and much easier to program than Python.

By "architectural differences" I mean the the nature and/or order of binaries to be run, command line arguments, configuration parameters and the like.

If possible, I'd like to upgrade the Perl script so that those who find Perl more congenial can continue to use it.

Paul[/quote]

If you have root access on this RHEL 5 machine, you might try to do a stock "./configure; make; make test; make install" of python 2.6 from source, which would install python 2.6 into /usr/local.

I don't believe (but cannot guarantee) that it would have any negative effect on other parts of your system which depend on /usr/bin/python.

[quote=mdettweiler;204968]Hey, looky, I did find something after all. I eat my words about there probably not being any such thing in existence. :smile:

[URL]http://www.py2exe.org/[/URL]

This appears to be just for Windows, though, so while it would be helpful for that, it wouldn't be any help to Linux users with an older version of Python.[/quote]
That was why I referenced "freeze" above. (According to documentation), It offers a way to compile python scripts and allow their use in linux systems without the python interpreter. However, since the script gets compiled, there is no way to edit the paths for ggnfs and msieve, or the cpu value. To be effective as a compiled version, it would then need an accompanying configuration file, with the appropriate calls within the compiled version. Possibly doable, but the last thing would be someone to perform that work on a continuing basis, because it would have to be done by someone with the necessary Python version. Also, since my Python 2.6 isn't installed, its freeze routine is not yet working. I am looking at that, though, and if I experience any more successes, I will provide the info here.

Take Care,
Ed

[quote=mdettweiler;204968]This appears to be just for Windows, though, so while it would be helpful for that, it wouldn't be any help to Linux users with an older version of Python.[/quote]
Couldn't they just use Wine?
But then there's still the problem of the config values, that EdH just mentioned.

[QUOTE=rlangley;205216]If you have root access on this RHEL 5 machine, you might try to do a stock "./configure; make; make test; make install" of python 2.6 from source, which would install python 2.6 into /usr/local.

I don't believe (but cannot guarantee) that it would have any negative effect on other parts of your system which depend on /usr/bin/python.[/QUOTE]Can, but won't.

It's not my machine and I'm not going to fiddle with it unless I have a good reason which I'm happy to discuss with the owners. Wanting to run factmsieve.py is not a good enough reason.


Paul