#9921: nose testing suite as an optional spkg
-------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
Reporter: jason | Owner: tbd
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-5.1
Component: optional packages | Resolution:
Keywords: sd41 | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Reviewers: Karl-Dieter Crisman
Authors: John Palmieri | Merged in:
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
Changes (by kcrisman):
* reviewer: => Karl-Dieter Crisman
Old description:
> Several projects we depend on use nose to do self-tests. In order to
> test these packages, we'd have to have nose installed.
>
> This is fairly simple without an spkg:
>
> {{{
> wget http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/n/nose/nose-1.1.2.tar.gz # or
> the latest version at http://pypi.python.org/pypi/nose/
> tar xzvf nose-1.1.2.tar.gz
> cd nose-1.1.2
> sage -python setup.py install
> }}}
>
> However, it might make sense to have nose be an optional spkg.
>
> Matplotlib relies on nose to do tests
> (http://matplotlib.sourceforge.net/devel/coding_guide.html#testing), as
> well as numpy/scipy
> (http://projects.scipy.org/numpy/wiki/TestingGuidelines).
>
> ---------------
>
> New spkg:
> [http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/palmieri/SPKG/nose-1.1.2.spkg
> version 1.1.2],
> [http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/palmieri/SPKG/nose-1.1.3.git20120614.spkg
> version 1.1.3 from git]
>
> Apply [attachment:trac_9921-nose-scripts.patch] to the scripts repo.
New description:
Several projects we depend on use nose to do self-tests. In order to test
these packages, we'd have to have nose installed.
This is fairly simple without an spkg:
{{{
wget http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/n/nose/nose-1.1.2.tar.gz # or
the latest version at http://pypi.python.org/pypi/nose/
tar xzvf nose-1.1.2.tar.gz
cd nose-1.1.2
sage -python setup.py install
}}}
However, it might make sense to have nose be an optional spkg.
Matplotlib relies on nose to do tests
(http://matplotlib.sourceforge.net/devel/coding_guide.html#testing), as
well as numpy/scipy
(http://projects.scipy.org/numpy/wiki/TestingGuidelines).
---------------
New spkg:
[http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/palmieri/SPKG/nose-1.1.2.spkg
version 1.1.2].
(Alternate spkg
[http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/palmieri/SPKG/nose-1.1.3.git20120614.spkg
version 1.1.3 from git].)
Apply [attachment:trac_9921-nose-scripts.patch] to the scripts repo.
--
Comment:
This is ridiculous. Nose works fine at testing things on sage.math. It
certainly finds various errors and warnings - apparently scipy generates a
number as well, I just tried it.
The issue with it not passing its own tests is not so good, and I can
confirm this in both cases. On the plus side, it only breaks the Sage
installation process in the 1.1.3, so I would say let's go with the 1.1.2
for now.
----
I do get something weird, hopefully unrelated to nose itself, but instead
related to our defaults for matplotlib.
{{{
kcrisman@sage:~/sage-5.1.beta1-boxen-x86_64-Linux$ ./sage -c 'import
matplotlib; matplotlib.test()'
======================================================================
ERROR: Failure: OSError (No such file
/home/kcrisman/sage-5.1.beta1-boxen-x86_64-Linux/import matplotlib;
matplotlib.test())
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
File
"/home/kcrisman/sage-5.1.beta1-boxen-x86_64-Linux/local/lib/python2.7
/site-packages/nose-1.1.2-py2.7.egg/nose/failure.py", line 39, in runTest
raise self.exc_class(self.exc_val)
OSError: No such file
/home/kcrisman/sage-5.1.beta1-boxen-x86_64-Linux/import matplotlib;
matplotlib.test()
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 1 test in 0.001s
FAILED (errors=1)
sage: import matplotlib
sage: matplotlib.test()
======================================================================
ERROR: Failure: ValueError (Unable to load tests from file
/home/kcrisman/sage-5.1.beta1-boxen-x86_64-Linux/sage)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
File
"/home/kcrisman/sage-5.1.beta1-boxen-x86_64-Linux/local/lib/python2.7
/site-packages/nose-1.1.2-py2.7.egg/nose/loader.py", line 213, in
loadTestsFromFile
% filename)
ValueError: Unable to load tests from file
/home/kcrisman/sage-5.1.beta1-boxen-x86_64-Linux/sage
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 1 test in 0.001s
FAILED (errors=1)
False
}}}
On a computer without nose:
{{{
sage: matplotlib.test()
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ImportError Traceback (most recent call
last)
/Users/karl-dietercrisman/Downloads/sage-5.1.beta6/<ipython console> in
<module>()
/Users/.../sage-5.1.beta6/local/lib/python2.7/site-
packages/matplotlib/__init__.pyc in test(verbosity)
986 def test(verbosity=0):
987 """run the matplotlib test suite"""
--> 988 import nose
989 import nose.plugins.builtin
990 from testing.noseclasses import KnownFailure
ImportError: No module named nose
}}}
I think that in matplotlib's lib/__init__.py
{{{
success = nose.run( defaultTest=default_test_modules,
config=config,
)
}}}
we aren't using the right default modules, they aren't imported or
something. So it goes back to just looking at `.` for the default test
module - I get the same thing.
{{{
sage: nose.run(defaultTest='.')
E
======================================================================
ERROR: Failure: ValueError (Unable to load tests from file
/home/kcrisman/sage-5.1.beta1-boxen-x86_64-Linux/sage)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
File
"/home/kcrisman/sage-5.1.beta1-boxen-x86_64-Linux/local/lib/python2.7
/site-packages/nose-1.1.2-py2.7.egg/nose/loader.py", line 213, in
loadTestsFromFile
% filename)
ValueError: Unable to load tests from file
/home/kcrisman/sage-5.1.beta1-boxen-x86_64-Linux/sage
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 1 test in 0.001s
FAILED (errors=1)
False
}}}
Can you see a reason why this shouldn't have positive review? I just
think this must be a problem in how we're dealing with mpl. I'm surprised
it does this; we only removed the baseline images, not the testing
scripts!
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9921#comment:27>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.
