Sage 4.1.2.alpha2 doctest failures on Debian
Minh Nguyen
Sage 4.1.2.alpha2 compiles fine on x86 Debian 5. The following doctests failed:
{{{
sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/crypto/boolean_function.pyx"
**********************************************************************
File "/space/wstein/farm/sage-4.1.2.alpha2/devel/sage/sage/crypto/boolean_function.pyx",
line 1013:
sage: B.nonlinearity()
Expected:
222
Got:
217
**********************************************************************
1 items had failures:
1 of 6 in __main__.example_36
***Test Failed*** 1 failures.
For whitespace errors, see the file
/space/wstein/farm/sage-4.1.2.alpha2/tmp/.doctest_boolean_function.py
[4.1 s]
<SNIP>
sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/rings/polynomial/pbori.pyx"
**********************************************************************
File "/space/wstein/farm/sage-4.1.2.alpha2/devel/sage/sage/rings/polynomial/pbori.pyx",
line 3940:
sage: x.stable_hash()
Expected:
173100285919
Got:
-845955105
**********************************************************************
File "/space/wstein/farm/sage-4.1.2.alpha2/devel/sage/sage/rings/polynomial/pbori.pyx",
line 4849:
sage: s.stable_hash()
Expected:
173100285919
Got:
-845955105
**********************************************************************
File "/space/wstein/farm/sage-4.1.2.alpha2/devel/sage/sage/rings/polynomial/pbori.pyx",
line 1976:
sage: m.stable_hash()
Expected:
173100285919
Got:
-845955105
**********************************************************************
3 items had failures:
1 of 4 in __main__.example_128
1 of 5 in __main__.example_165
1 of 5 in __main__.example_48
***Test Failed*** 3 failures.
For whitespace errors, see the file
/space/wstein/farm/sage-4.1.2.alpha2/tmp/.doctest_pbori.py
[5.3 s]
<SNIP>
sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/interfaces/expect.py"
**********************************************************************
File "/space/wstein/farm/sage-4.1.2.alpha2/devel/sage/sage/interfaces/expect.py",
line 1599:
sage: gp(10.^80)._sage_repr()
Expected nothing
Got:
'1.000000000000000000000000000e80'
**********************************************************************
1 items had failures:
1 of 3 in __main__.example_45
***Test Failed*** 1 failures.
For whitespace errors, see the file
/space/wstein/farm/sage-4.1.2.alpha2/tmp/.doctest_expect.py
[17.4 s]
sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/interfaces/all.py"
[0.1 s]
sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/interfaces/rubik.py"
[37.8 s]
sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/interfaces/gp.py"
**********************************************************************
File "/space/wstein/farm/sage-4.1.2.alpha2/devel/sage/sage/interfaces/gp.py",
line 567:
sage: repr(gp(10.^80)).replace(gp._exponent_symbol(), 'e')
Expected nothing
Got:
'1.000000000000000000000000000e80'
**********************************************************************
1 items had failures:
1 of 4 in __main__.example_26
***Test Failed*** 1 failures.
For whitespace errors, see the file
/space/wstein/farm/sage-4.1.2.alpha2/tmp/.doctest_gp.py
[3.5 s]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The following tests failed:
sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/crypto/boolean_function.pyx"
sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/rings/polynomial/pbori.pyx"
sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/interfaces/expect.py"
sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/interfaces/gp.py"
Total time for all tests: 6990.6 seconds
}}}
--
Regards
Minh Van Nguyen
Minh Nguyen
> Hi folks,
>
> Sage 4.1.2.alpha2 compiles fine on x86 Debian 5. The following doctests failed:
The build machine is debian5-32, a VM guest on boxen.math.
Sage 4.1.2.alpha2 also builds on debian5-64, an x86_64 Debian 5 VM
guest on boxen.math. All doctests pass.
Felix Lawrence
The doctest failures in
sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/interfaces/gp.py"
bit answer, e.g.
sage: gp(10.^80)._sage_repr()
'1.0000000000000000000000000000000000000e80' # 64-bit
needs to be changed to
sage: gp(10.^80)._sage_repr()
'1.0000000000000000000000000000000000000e80' # 64-bit
'1.000000000000000000000000000e80' # 32-bit
I've created a patch to apply these two trivial changes, but was
unsure what the etiquette is for fixing these doctest failures - I
imagine creating a new ticket would be overkill. Should I add the
patch to the original (closed) ticket?
Cheers,
Felix
On Sep 23, 9:35 am, Minh Nguyen <nguyenmi...@gmail.com> wrote:
John H Palmieri
> I've created a patch to apply these two trivial changes, but was
> unsure what the etiquette is for fixing these doctest failures - I
> imagine creating a new ticket would be overkill. Should I add the
> patch to the original (closed) ticket?
a new ticket and put pointers from the old ticket to this one, and
vice versa. (We don't tend to worry about overkill: a ticket from
earlier today changed a single word in the documentation.)
Minh Nguyen
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Felix Lawrence
<fe...@physics.usyd.edu.au> wrote:
>
> Hi Minh,
>
> The doctest failures in
> sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/interfaces/expect.py"
> sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/interfaces/gp.py"
> are my fault - I forgot to include a 32-bit answer as well as the 64-
> bit answer
Oh, I see. That explains why I consistently get those doctest failures
on 32-bit platforms. Thank you for making this clear.
> I've created a patch to apply these two trivial changes, but was
> unsure what the etiquette is for fixing these doctest failures - I
> imagine creating a new ticket would be overkill. Should I add the
> patch to the original (closed) ticket?
I would agree with what John said: open another ticket to address the issue.
Felix Lawrence
The patch is attached to that ticket.
While I've got your attention, I believe that the patches for #4948
also fixed the doctest failure that was #6331 : http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6331
.
Cheers,
Felix