Re: galoisinit() bug

[Igor Schein <igor@txc.com>]

On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 10:36:23AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2004 at 07:22:49PM -0400, Igor Schein wrote:
> > On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 12:21:30AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 09:11:23PM -0400, Igor Schein wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > ? galoisinit(x^4+272*x^3+40256*x^2+1740800*x+25397248);
> > > >   ***   prime too small in fixedfield.
> > > > 
> > > > It was already broken in 2.2.4.
> > > ... and even in 2.2.0.
> > 
> > Not according to this:
> > 
> >                     GP/PARI CALCULATOR Version 2.2.0 (alpha)
> 
> You are right, I meant 2.2.1, with this change:
> ---
> revision 1.62
> date: 2001/09/24 14:14:59;  author: bill;  state: Exp;  lines: +95 -71
> Better strategy for galoisfixedfield
> More argument checking for galoisfixedfield
> ---
> Note that it was working only by luck before this date.
> 
> Cheers,
> Bill.

Sorry to be anal, but

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
                    GP/PARI CALCULATOR Version 2.2.3 (alpha)
                i686 running linux (ix86 kernel) 32-bit version
              (readline v4.3 enabled, extended help not available)

                       Copyright (C) 2002 The PARI Group

PARI/GP is free software, covered by the GNU General Public License, and 
comes WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY WHATSOEVER.

Type ? for help, \q to quit.
Type ?12 for how to get moral (and possibly technical) support.

   realprecision = 28 significant digits
   seriesprecision = 16 significant terms
   format = g0.28

parisize = 4000000, primelimit = 500000
   echo = 1 (on)
? galoisinit(x^4+272*x^3+40256*x^2+1740800*x+25397248)
[x^4 + 272*x^3 + 40256*x^2 + 1740800*x + 25397248, [17, 21, 6909193391300873
2880827217], [54788191479952672830743812, 28290734719886474294764833, 237832
63013130430844838237, 31321678613047887791307280]~, [14629781977821762673907
733, 3245196805214186049455706, 33391788806148314365847873, 1782516632382514
2454037409; 25516735263042525155099866, 63098346641761857400313058, 24446613
846062456328814193, 25122172075150626877427317; 14494000010566912989682183, 
60569751069206831809871886, 52675057876975660786110445, 10445058869268060175
989920; 60642131760321395368041510, 39541637065706440896995644, 156369475918
58095232867736, 22363151408131534263749544], 672662421504, [Vecsmall([1, 2, 
3, 4]), Vecsmall([4, 3, 2, 1]), Vecsmall([2, 1, 4, 3]), Vecsmall([3, 4, 1, 2
])], [Vecsmall([4, 3, 2, 1]), Vecsmall([2, 1, 4, 3])], Vecsmall([2, 2])]
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

Can this also be explained by a luck factor?  That was the reason I
said 2.2.4 in the first place, because I tried all 2.2 release prior
to it, and it was working fine.

Thanks

Igor