ANN: Julia 0.6.1 is here!

Announcements
21

can we still download 0.6.0 windows binaries?

22

Checkout Releases · JuliaLang/julia · GitHub

1 Like
23

Adjust edit the links on Download Julia from 0.6.1 to 0.6.0: e.g. https://julialang-s3.julialang.org/bin/winnt/x64/0.6/julia-0.6.0-win64.exe

1 Like
24

thank you both!
I could not find them here https://julialang.org/downloads/oldreleases.html so I began to worry

25

I downloaded v0.6.1 on my home computer (not JuliaPro, but the basic 64bit Julia download). Prior to this, I’ve updated 4 computers to Win10 Fall Creators Update, and I use OneDrive to sync files among these computers. Some observations from an unexperienced Julia user.

  1. I thought that “Pkg.update()” would update Julia from v0.6.0 to v.0.6.1. Didn’t happen; I had to uninstall v0.6.0 and then install v0.6.1. No problem, I’m sure it is mentioned somewhere in the documentation.
  2. I assumed that packages also had been uninstalled. Not so – when I tried to “Pkg.add()” a package, I was told it was already installed. No problem.
  3. “using IJulia” and then “notebook()” – caused some problems. IJulia tried to use Julia v0.6.0 as kernel, which was not there any longer. So I had to remove ("Pkg.rm(“IJulia”)) and re-add it.
  4. Key remaining problem: “include” function doesn’t work properly with files stored under the “OneDrive” subdirectory on the C drive (c:\Users\Username\OneDrive\…). Same problem with v0.6.0. I assume this problem is due to a flaw in OneDrive on the first version of Win10 Fall Creators Update?
1 Like
26

As the module identifier Pkg indicates, this only updates packages.

Packages are divided into subfolders based on minor releases, typically in ~/.julia/v0.6/ so those packages are installed for all v0.6.x versions.

As per the IJulia README, you have to Pkg.build("IJulia").

1 Like
27

It seems that the official build for Julia 0.6.1 requires a different libc version than Julia 0.6.0 on linux, which causes a number of link issues when building extension modules.

Errors such as:

/home/travis/julia/lib/julia/libLLVM-3.9.so: undefined reference to `std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >::append(char const*, unsigned long)@GLIBCXX_3.4.21'

and many more of the like.

28

Thanks for clarification. Is it only IJulia that needs to be built? I was thinking of running a script with removing and adding the packages, but since there is a problem with Win 10 Fall Creators Update, the include statement doesn’t work for script files stored under the OneDrive directory. Hopefully, MS fixes this soon, though.

29

Thanks for the ARM builds as well. I successfully tested it on my Raspberry Pi 3 running Raspbian over the weekend. I was even able to use PyPlot and DataFrames.

:+1:

4 Likes
30

Thanks for your work to keep progress on the march!
I downloaded julia-0.6.1-win64.exe and found that the sha256 from shadeep.exe doesn’t match the value listed on the website for the new release for Win-64. This is a first for me.
Has there been an update to the executable since the sha value was posted.
I get 2e653519be1986b35814f593d60aa7937f28f2ec158b6f66b040a02af5693069,
not 776687fc2023b67fd5ee33a4a61417460e88477ef5bed1afcf3007cdd5b9e5bc as the site indicates.
If my sha calculator is on the fritz, please let me know.

31

Good catch. The Windows binaries had to be code signed again with an updated certificate but the SHAs were not updated after that.

32

I’ve updated the checksums. Please let me know if you run into any more issues with that.

33

I checked the sha265 hashes on the Julia site, but they look the same as they were.

Could you check the results I sent for the win64 executable vs. the one you got?

34

Ah sorry, I had forgotten to purge the Fastly cache, so it was still pointing to the old file. It now reflects the updated checksums.

35

The hashes now match.
Thanks.