Bug#834856: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#834856: python-pysam fails to build on mips64el arch.: failed test
control: severity -1 important control: retitle -1 python-pysam: FTBFS on 32-bit architectures: segmentation fault in testsuite On 2016-10-23 12:25, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > On 23/10/16 00:48, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > On 2016-10-21 15:15, James Cowgill wrote: > >> On 21/10/16 14:55, YunQiang Su wrote: > >>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort > >>> wrote: > Control: severity -1 serious > > On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 22:29:48 -0700 Afif Elghraoui > wrote: > > Control: severity -1 important > > Control: tag -1 + help > > > > Hello and thank you for the report. > > > > على الجمعـة 19 آب 2016 ‫14:48، كتب Jonathan Jackson: > >> Package: python-pysam > >> Version: 0.9.1.4+ds-1 > >> Severity: grave > >> Justification: renders package unusable > >> > > > > While the package may be unusable on mips64el, it works well for the > > vast majority of users as I understand it, so this situation deserves a > > severity of 'important' rather than 'grave'. > > mips64el is a release architecture, thus this bug is serious. > >>> > >>> mips64el seems building successfully now, while mipsel fails. > >>> I guess it is due to Loongson machine. > >> > >> If mips64el has built (possibly one of the build machines is 'nicer' to > >> it), is this bug RC anymore? > >> > >>> Let me have a give-back on mipsel. > >> > >> While it could help, the same segfault happens on armel, mipsel and x32 > >> according to the build logs. I don't think it's hardware specific. > >> > >> https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=python-pysam > > > > I agree with this analysis. I confirm it doesn't build either on > > eller.d.o and from what I have been able to start debugging with GDB, it > > rather looks like some bug in the 32-bit support. There is something > > wrong in htslib or the cython code which doesn't convert C struct into > > Python struct correctly. > > > > I therefore also suggest to downgrade the severity of this bug, maybe > > also retitling it to say it fail to all 32-bit architectures. > > Sounds good. > Ok, doing so with this mail. Aurelien -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
Bug#834856: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#834856: python-pysam fails to build on mips64el arch.: failed test
On 23/10/16 00:48, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > On 2016-10-21 15:15, James Cowgill wrote: >> On 21/10/16 14:55, YunQiang Su wrote: >>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort >>> wrote: Control: severity -1 serious On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 22:29:48 -0700 Afif Elghraoui wrote: > Control: severity -1 important > Control: tag -1 + help > > Hello and thank you for the report. > > على الجمعـة 19 آب 2016 ‫14:48، كتب Jonathan Jackson: >> Package: python-pysam >> Version: 0.9.1.4+ds-1 >> Severity: grave >> Justification: renders package unusable >> > > While the package may be unusable on mips64el, it works well for the > vast majority of users as I understand it, so this situation deserves a > severity of 'important' rather than 'grave'. mips64el is a release architecture, thus this bug is serious. >>> >>> mips64el seems building successfully now, while mipsel fails. >>> I guess it is due to Loongson machine. >> >> If mips64el has built (possibly one of the build machines is 'nicer' to >> it), is this bug RC anymore? >> >>> Let me have a give-back on mipsel. >> >> While it could help, the same segfault happens on armel, mipsel and x32 >> according to the build logs. I don't think it's hardware specific. >> >> https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=python-pysam > > I agree with this analysis. I confirm it doesn't build either on > eller.d.o and from what I have been able to start debugging with GDB, it > rather looks like some bug in the 32-bit support. There is something > wrong in htslib or the cython code which doesn't convert C struct into > Python struct correctly. > > I therefore also suggest to downgrade the severity of this bug, maybe > also retitling it to say it fail to all 32-bit architectures. Sounds good. Emilio
Bug#834856: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#834856: python-pysam fails to build on mips64el arch.: failed test
On 2016-10-21 15:15, James Cowgill wrote: > On 21/10/16 14:55, YunQiang Su wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort > > wrote: > >> Control: severity -1 serious > >> > >> On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 22:29:48 -0700 Afif Elghraoui wrote: > >>> Control: severity -1 important > >>> Control: tag -1 + help > >>> > >>> Hello and thank you for the report. > >>> > >>> على الجمعـة 19 آب 2016 ‫14:48، كتب Jonathan Jackson: > Package: python-pysam > Version: 0.9.1.4+ds-1 > Severity: grave > Justification: renders package unusable > > >>> > >>> While the package may be unusable on mips64el, it works well for the > >>> vast majority of users as I understand it, so this situation deserves a > >>> severity of 'important' rather than 'grave'. > >> > >> mips64el is a release architecture, thus this bug is serious. > > > > mips64el seems building successfully now, while mipsel fails. > > I guess it is due to Loongson machine. > > If mips64el has built (possibly one of the build machines is 'nicer' to > it), is this bug RC anymore? > > > Let me have a give-back on mipsel. > > While it could help, the same segfault happens on armel, mipsel and x32 > according to the build logs. I don't think it's hardware specific. > > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=python-pysam I agree with this analysis. I confirm it doesn't build either on eller.d.o and from what I have been able to start debugging with GDB, it rather looks like some bug in the 32-bit support. There is something wrong in htslib or the cython code which doesn't convert C struct into Python struct correctly. I therefore also suggest to downgrade the severity of this bug, maybe also retitling it to say it fail to all 32-bit architectures. -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#834856: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#834856: python-pysam fails to build on mips64el arch.: failed test
On 21/10/16 14:55, YunQiang Su wrote: > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort > wrote: >> Control: severity -1 serious >> >> On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 22:29:48 -0700 Afif Elghraoui wrote: >>> Control: severity -1 important >>> Control: tag -1 + help >>> >>> Hello and thank you for the report. >>> >>> على الجمعـة 19 آب 2016 ‫14:48، كتب Jonathan Jackson: Package: python-pysam Version: 0.9.1.4+ds-1 Severity: grave Justification: renders package unusable >>> >>> While the package may be unusable on mips64el, it works well for the >>> vast majority of users as I understand it, so this situation deserves a >>> severity of 'important' rather than 'grave'. >> >> mips64el is a release architecture, thus this bug is serious. > > mips64el seems building successfully now, while mipsel fails. > I guess it is due to Loongson machine. If mips64el has built (possibly one of the build machines is 'nicer' to it), is this bug RC anymore? > Let me have a give-back on mipsel. While it could help, the same segfault happens on armel, mipsel and x32 according to the build logs. I don't think it's hardware specific. https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=python-pysam Thanks, James signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#834856: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#834856: python-pysam fails to build on mips64el arch.: failed test
On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > Control: severity -1 serious > > On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 22:29:48 -0700 Afif Elghraoui wrote: >> Control: severity -1 important >> Control: tag -1 + help >> >> Hello and thank you for the report. >> >> على الجمعـة 19 آب 2016 ‫14:48، كتب Jonathan Jackson: >> > Package: python-pysam >> > Version: 0.9.1.4+ds-1 >> > Severity: grave >> > Justification: renders package unusable >> > >> >> While the package may be unusable on mips64el, it works well for the >> vast majority of users as I understand it, so this situation deserves a >> severity of 'important' rather than 'grave'. > > mips64el is a release architecture, thus this bug is serious. mips64el seems building successfully now, while mipsel fails. I guess it is due to Loongson machine. Let me have a give-back on mipsel. > >> > Python-pysam packages failed to build on March 24th on a mips64el >> > architecture. Here is the tail of the failed-build log: >> > >> [...] >> >> I'd be happy to apply any patch that resolves this problem, but porting >> work is beyond what I can commit to do for this package. > > Cc'ing debian-mips, maybe they can provide some help. > > Cheers, > Emilio > -- YunQiang Su
Bug#834856: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#834856: python-pysam fails to build on mips64el arch.: failed test
Control: severity -1 serious On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 22:29:48 -0700 Afif Elghraoui wrote: > Control: severity -1 important > Control: tag -1 + help > > Hello and thank you for the report. > > عÙ٠اÙج٠عÙØ© 19 آب 2016 â«14:48Ø Ùتب Jonathan Jackson: > > Package: python-pysam > > Version: 0.9.1.4+ds-1 > > Severity: grave > > Justification: renders package unusable > > > > While the package may be unusable on mips64el, it works well for the > vast majority of users as I understand it, so this situation deserves a > severity of 'important' rather than 'grave'. mips64el is a release architecture, thus this bug is serious. > > Python-pysam packages failed to build on March 24th on a mips64el > > architecture. Here is the tail of the failed-build log: > > > [...] > > I'd be happy to apply any patch that resolves this problem, but porting > work is beyond what I can commit to do for this package. Cc'ing debian-mips, maybe they can provide some help. Cheers, Emilio
Bug#834856: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#834856: python-pysam fails to build on mips64el arch.: failed test
Control: severity -1 important Control: tag -1 + help Hello and thank you for the report. على الجمعـة 19 آب 2016 14:48، كتب Jonathan Jackson: > Package: python-pysam > Version: 0.9.1.4+ds-1 > Severity: grave > Justification: renders package unusable > While the package may be unusable on mips64el, it works well for the vast majority of users as I understand it, so this situation deserves a severity of 'important' rather than 'grave'. > > Python-pysam packages failed to build on March 24th on a mips64el > architecture. Here is the tail of the failed-build log: > [...] I'd be happy to apply any patch that resolves this problem, but porting work is beyond what I can commit to do for this package. Many thanks and regards Afif -- Afif Elghraoui | عفيف الغراوي http://afif.ghraoui.name