Since I haven't check on any prior update, I consider this just a baseline and don't see this as a reason to hold up the update.
Notes inline. backing off on png gave a passing test. backing off on jpeg... no change. Other issues, I'll see if I can look into later. -kurt On Aug 24, 2013, at 11:26 AM, Even Rouault <[email protected]> wrote: > Le samedi 24 août 2013 19:57:47, Kurt Schwehr a écrit : >> LGTM with respect to fink package on mac osx 10.8 >> >> - Looks like I have a todo on jasper. >> - not sure on http_4 >> - png.py and test_gdalwarp below. >> - rest are flagged as know issues or pre-release things > > Hi Kurt, > > Thanks for your testing. Comments below > >> >> -kurt >> >> >> ------------ Failures ------------ >> Script: ogr/ogr_shape.py >> TEST: ogr_shape_68 ... fail >> line 3249: fail > > Yes, I observed that it fails on Travis too on the Mac. Not sure why being > not > in a position to debug on the Mac. Advanced stuff, not critical if it doesn't > work > >> Script: gcore/basic_test.py >> TEST: basic_test_8 ... fail > > Same, fails on Travis for unknown reason on the Mac. The test is likely a bit > fragile. > >> line 161: fail >> Script: gcore/gdal_api_proxy.py >> TEST: gdal_api_proxy_3 ... fail > > Same, fails on Travis for unknown reason on the Mac. Advanced stuff, not > critical if it doesn't work > >> Script: gdrivers/gdalhttp.py >> TEST: http_4 ... fail > > Might be linked to a temporary unavailability of the remote resource. I > somehow remember that it can fail sometimes, but I have never tested on the > Mac, so it might not be just an interminent failure > > Does "gdalinfo > /vsicurl/ftp://ftp2.cits.rncan.gc.ca/pub/cantopo/250k_tif/MCR2010_01.tif"; > repeatedly fail ? > > You can try adding "--debug CPL_CURL_VERBOSE YES" for more info. > I think you called it with just being a network issue ./gdalhttp.py TEST: http_1 ... success TEST: http_2 ... success TEST: http_3 ... success TEST: http_4 ... success TEST: http_cleanup ... success Test Script: http Succeeded: 5 Failed: 0 (0 blew exceptions) Skipped: 0 Expected fail:0 Duration: 11.35s >> Script: gdrivers/jpeg2000.py >> TEST: jpeg2000_8 ... fail >> line 189: Jasper library would need patches > > Yes, this is a defect in upstream jasper that most linux distro have patched. > Applying Debian patches might help you fix that > >> Script: gdrivers/png.py >> TEST: png_1 ... fail >> line 429: Checksum for band 1 in "test.png" is 6846, but expected >> 57921. TEST: png_2 ... fail >> line 484: Failed to create test file using CreateCopy method. >> libpng: No IDATs written into file > > Hum, this is new to me. Which libpng version do you use ? > otool -L /sw/bin/gdalinfo | grep png /sw/lib/libpng16.16.dylib (compatibility version 20.0.0, current version 20.0.0) libpng16 1.6.3-1 backing off to libpng15 1.5.17-1 gives success: otool -L /sw/bin/gdalinfo | grep png /sw/lib/libpng15.15.dylib (compatibility version 33.0.0, current version 33.0.0) ./png.py TEST: png_1 ... success TEST: png_2 ... success TEST: png_3 ... success TEST: png_4 ... success TEST: png_5 ... success TEST: png_6 ... success TEST: png_7 ... success TEST: png_8 ... success TEST: png_9 ... success TEST: png_10 ... success TEST: png_11 ... success Test Script: png Succeeded: 11 Failed: 0 (0 blew exceptions) Skipped: 0 Expected fail:0 Duration: 0.05s >> Script: utilities/test_gdalwarp.py >> TEST: test_gdalwarp_33 ... fail > > The test might be a bit fragile indeed. It might depend on the libjpeg > version > you are using. There's a tolerance at 37, and you have reached 40. Could > likely be changed to 40. > otool -L /sw/bin/gdalinfo | grep jp /sw/lib/libjpeg.9.dylib (compatibility version 10.0.0, current version 10.0.0) i libjpeg9-shlibs 9-3 Shared libraries for libjpeg package Backing off still has a test that fails otool -L /sw/bin/gdalinfo | grep jp /sw/lib/libjpeg.8.dylib (compatibility version 13.0.0, current version 13.0.0) i libjpeg8-shlibs 8d-3 TEST: test_gdalwarp_33 ... Diff at pixel (160, 0) : 7.000000 Diff at pixel (161, 0) : 1.000000 Diff at pixel (162, 0) : 6.000000 Diff at pixel (165, 0) : 2.000000 Diff at pixel (167, 0) : 8.000000 Diff at pixel (169, 0) : 8.000000 Diff at pixel (173, 0) : 4.000000 Diff at pixel (174, 0) : 9.000000 Diff at pixel (176, 0) : 9.000000 Diff at pixel (189, 0) : 10.000000 Diff at pixel (266, 0) : 13.000000 Diff at pixel (284, 0) : 17.000000 Diff at pixel (172, 1) : 22.000000 Diff at pixel (265, 1) : 31.000000 Diff at pixel (301, 6) : 32.000000 Diff at pixel (388, 37) : 38.000000 Diff at pixel (118, 319) : 40.000000 Max diff : 40 Number of diffs : 3683 fail TEST: test_gdalwarp_34 ... success TEST: test_gdalwarp_35 ... success TEST: test_gdalwarp_36 ... success TEST: test_gdalwarp_cleanup ... success Test Script: test_gdalwarp Succeeded: 37 Failed: 1 (0 blew exceptions) Skipped: 0 Expected fail:0 Duration: 1.80s >> ---------------------------------- >> >> Succeeded: 2608 >> Failed: 8 (0 blew exceptions) >> Skipped: 723 >> Expected fail:12 >> Duration: 06m4.3s >> As GDAL_DOWNLOAD_TEST_DATA environment variable is not defined, 107 tests >> relying on data to downloaded from the Web have been skipped As >> GDAL_RUN_SLOW_TESTS environment variable is not defined, 22 "slow" tests >> have been skipped >> >> >> png.py: >> >> python png.py >> TEST: png_1 ... ERROR 1: libpng: IDAT: invalid distance too far back >> ERROR 1: data/test.png, band 1: IReadBlock failed at X offset 0, Y offset >> 29 ERROR 1: GetBlockRef failed at X block offset 0, Y block offset 29 >> ERROR 3: Checksum value couldn't be computed due to I/O read error. >> >> fail >> line 429: Checksum for band 1 in "test.png" is 6846, but expected >> 57921. TEST: png_2 ... ERROR 1: libpng: IDAT: invalid distance too far >> back ERROR 1: data/test.png, band 1: IReadBlock failed at X offset 0, Y >> offset 29 ERROR 1: libpng: IDAT: invalid distance too far back >> ERROR 1: data/test.png, band 1: IReadBlock failed at X offset 0, Y offset >> 30 ERROR 1: libpng: IDAT: invalid distance too far back >> >> >> >> TEST: test_gdalwarp_32 ... success >> TEST: test_gdalwarp_33 ... Diff at pixel (160, 0) : 7.000000 >> Diff at pixel (161, 0) : 1.000000 >> Diff at pixel (162, 0) : 6.000000 >> Diff at pixel (165, 0) : 2.000000 >> Diff at pixel (167, 0) : 8.000000 >> Diff at pixel (169, 0) : 8.000000 >> Diff at pixel (173, 0) : 4.000000 >> Diff at pixel (174, 0) : 9.000000 >> Diff at pixel (176, 0) : 9.000000 >> Diff at pixel (189, 0) : 10.000000 >> Diff at pixel (266, 0) : 13.000000 >> Diff at pixel (284, 0) : 17.000000 >> Diff at pixel (172, 1) : 22.000000 >> Diff at pixel (265, 1) : 31.000000 >> Diff at pixel (301, 6) : 32.000000 >> Diff at pixel (388, 37) : 38.000000 >> Diff at pixel (118, 319) : 40.000000 >> Max diff : 40 >> Number of diffs : 3683 >> fail >> TEST: test_gdalwarp_34 ... success >> >> On Aug 23, 2013, at 11:27 AM, Even Rouault <[email protected]> > wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> PSC members, please vote for the following motion after conducting your >>> own testing. >>> Non-PSC members please let us know if you discover problems. >>> >>> --- >>> >>> Motion: The GDAL/OGR 1.10.1RC1 package is promoted as the >>> final GDAL/OGR 1.10.1 release. >>> >>> +1 Even >> >> _______________________________________________ >> gdal-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev > > -- > Geospatial professional services > http://even.rouault.free.fr/services.html _______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
