Discussion related to cado-nfs

[Emmanuel Thomé <Emmanuel.Thome@inria.fr>]

Parameter files are provided only for 60 digits and up (and also for 30
digits, but that is an exception we use only for testing). It would be
feasible to fill this gap, but in this size range, qs is obviously a
better alternative.

I agree that the error message could certainly be more polite...

Regarding one of your earlier e-mails, don't mix "cmake" and "make". The
steps called "Configure" and "Compile" must be followed in order, and
then "Install" if you so wish.

E.

On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 01:14:43PM -0400, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> 
> This is very odd given that two previous tests worked fine :
> 
> nix$
> nix$ /usr/bin/time -p ./cado-nfs.py 18446744073709551601131234567890124193
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>   File "./cado-nfs.py", line 64, in <module>
>     parameters, db = toplevel_params.get_cooked_parameters()
>   File "./scripts/cadofactor/toplevel.py", line 1151, in
> get_cooked_parameters
>     self.set_N_paramfile_workdir()
>   File "./scripts/cadofactor/toplevel.py", line 634, in
> set_N_paramfile_workdir
>     self.args.parameters = self.find_default_parameter_file()
>   File "./scripts/cadofactor/toplevel.py", line 183, in
> find_default_parameter_file
>     " for %s (tried %s)" % (attempts[0], ", ".join(attempts)))
> RuntimeError: no parameter file found for c38 (tried c38, c40)
> Command exited with non-zero status 1
> real 0.08
> user 0.08
> sys 0.00
> nix$
> 
> 
> Any thoughts ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Dennis
> _______________________________________________
> Cado-nfs-discuss mailing list
> Cado-nfs-discuss@lists.gforge.inria.fr
> https://lists.gforge.inria.fr/mailman/listinfo/cado-nfs-discuss