On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 9:12 AM Paul Gevers <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Frederic-Emmanuel, > On 12-05-18 10:53, PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel wrote: > > It seems to me that the real culprite is python-numpy. > I agree. All errors are like: > ====================================================================== > ERROR: test06_attributes > (tables.tests.test_tables.RecArrayThreeWriteTestCase) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/tables/tests/test_tables.py", > line 138, in setUp > self.populateFile() > File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/tables/tests/test_tables.py", > line 213, in populateFile > self.initRecArray() > File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/tables/tests/test_tables.py", > line 207, in initRecArray > shape=self.expectedrows) > File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/numpy/core/records.py", line > 847, in array > return fromrecords(obj, dtype=dtype, shape=shape, **kwds) > File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/numpy/core/records.py", line > 708, in fromrecords > retval = sb.array(recList, dtype=descr) > TypeError: a float is required > But is this an issue that: > 1) just means the autopkgtests of pytables need updating as this is a > corner-case use and python-numpy has been warning for this change for > years? it could be, but we dont track super-closely every numpy release, so some deprecation warnings may have been missed. do we have historical autopkgtests logs to check? i would file a bug on pytables upstream issue tracker and ask to make it compatible with a more recent numpy > 2) means that pytables is now unusable at all and needs adaptations for > the new situation (python-numpy should add a proper "Breaks" > relation) > 3) python-numpy should be updated to add a grace period for this use > case as they dropped this support suddenly and the use is very common > (RC bug for python-numpy as it shouldn't migrate to testing) > 4) means something else. > Please add your thoughts. > Paul > ________________________________________ > > De : debian-science-maintainers [debian-science-maintainers-bounces+picca= [email protected]] de la part de Paul Gevers [ [email protected]] > > Envoyé : samedi 12 mai 2018 10:10 > > À : [email protected]; [email protected] > > Cc : Paul Gevers > > Objet : New version of numexpr breaks autopkgtests of pytables in testing > > > > Dear maintainers, > > > > [This e-mail is automatically sent. V2 (20180508)] > > > > As recently announced [1] Debian is now running autopkgtests in testing > > to check if the migration of a new source package causes regressions. It > > does this with the binary packages of the new version of the source > > package from unstable. > > > > With a recent upload of numexpr the autopkgtest of pytables > > started to fail in testing [2]. This is currently delaying the migration > > of numexpr version 2.6.5-1 [3]. > > > > This e-mail is meant to trigger prompt direct communication between the > > maintainers of the involved packages as one party has insight in what > > changed and the other party insight in what is being tested. Please > > therefore get in touch with each other with your ideas about what the > > causes of the problem might be, proposed patches, etc. A regression in a > > reverse dependency can be due to one of the following reasons (of course > > not complete): > > * new bug in the candidate package (fix the package) > > * bug in the test case that only gets triggered due to the update (fix > > the reverse dependency, but see below) > > * out-of-date reference date in the test case that captures a former bug > > in the candidate package (fix the reverse dependency, but see below) > > * deprecation of functionality that is used in the reverse dependency > > and/or its test case (discussion needed) > > Triaging tips are being collected on the Debian Wiki [4]. > > > > Unfortunately sometimes a regression is only intermittent. Ideally this > > should be fixed, but it may be OK to just have the autopkgtest retried > > (a link is available in the excuses [3]). > > > > There are cases where it is required to have multiple packages migrate > > together to have the test cases pass, e.g. when there was a bug in a > > regressing test case of a reverse dependency and that got fixed. In that > > case the test cases need to be triggered with both packages from > > unstable (reply to this e-mail and/or contact the ci-team [5]) or just > > wait until the aging time is over (if the fixed reverse dependency > > migrates before that time, the failed test can be retriggered [3]). > > > > Of course no system is perfect. In case a framework issue is suspected, > > don't hesitate to raise the issue via BTS or to the ci-team [5] (reply to > > me is also fine for initial cross-check). > > > > To avoid stepping on peoples toes, this e-mail does not automatically > > generate a bug in the BTS, but it is highly recommended to forward this > > e-mail there (psuedo-header boilerplate below [6,7]) in case it is > > clear which package should solve this regression. > > > > It can be appropriate to file an RC bug against the depended-on package, > > if the regression amounts to an RC bug in the depending package, and to > > keep it open while the matter is investigated. That will prevent > > migration of an RC regression. > > > > If the maintainers of the depending package don't have available effort > > to fix a problem, it is appropriate for the maintainers of the > > depended-on package to consider an NMU of the depending package. Any > > such an NMU should take place in accordance with the normal NMU rules. > > > > Neither of the above steps should be seen as hostile; they are part of > > trying to work together to keep Debian in tip-top shape. > > > > If you find that you are not able to agree between you about the right > > next steps, bug severities, etc., please try to find a neutral third > > party to help you mediate and/or provide a third opinion. Failing that > > your best bet is probably to post to debian-devel. > > > > [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2018/05/msg00001.html > > [2] https://ci.debian.net/packages/p/pytables/testing/amd64/ > > [3] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=numexpr > > [4] https://wiki.debian.org/ContinuousIntegration/TriagingTips > > [5] #debci on oftc or [email protected] > > [6] numexpr has an issue > > ============ > > Source: numexpr > > Version: 2.6.5-1 > > Severity: normal or higher > > Control: affects -1 src:pytables > > User: [email protected] > > Usertags: breaks > > ============ > > [7] pytables has an issue > > ============ > > Source: pytables > > Version: 3.4.3-1 > > Severity: normal or higher > > Control: affects -1 src:numexpr > > User: [email protected] > > Usertags: needs-update > > ============ > > > > -- > > debian-science-maintainers mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-science-maintainers > > -- Sandro "morph" Tosi My website: http://sandrotosi.me/ Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi G+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/+SandroTosi -- debian-science-maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-science-maintainers
