Bug#994457: r-cran-gnm autopkgtest needs to be adapted for lapack 3.10

2021-10-12 Thread Heather Turner
Dear Sébastien,

Thanks for the patch, that will certainly do the job till I get this fixed in 
the next gnm release - sorry I've not got to it yet.

Best wishes,

Heather

On Mon, Oct 11, 2021, at 5:14 PM, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> Dear Heather,
>
> Please find attached the patch that I am going to apply to r-cran-gnm
> in Debian.
>
> With this patch applied, the test now works with both lapack 3.9 and
> 3.10.
>
> Feel free to use it (or not) for the next release of gnm.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Le lundi 27 septembre 2021 à 12:01 +0100, Heather Turner a écrit :
>> Hi Andreas,
>> 
>> Thanks for forwarding this bug report and thanks to Sébastien for the 
>> detailed and accurate analysis. I will need to submit an update to CRAN, 
>> which should be feasible in the next week or two. Is there a deadline that I 
>> need to work to?
>> 
>> Best wishes,
>> 
>> Heather
>> 
>> On Mon, Sep 27, 2021, at 10:12 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
>> > Control: tags -1 upstream
>> > Control: forwarded -1 Heather Turner 
>> > 
>> > Hi Heather,
>> > 
>> > the Debian packaged gnm recieved a bug report about a failing test in
>> > connection with the upgrade to lapack 3.10.0 on the machine running the
>> > test.  Please read the bug report below.
>> > 
>> > We admit we need your help to solve this issue that might affect
>> > other systems as well.
>> > 
>> > Kind regards
>> > 
>> > Andreas.
>> > 
>> > On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 10:59:19AM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
>> > > Package: r-cran-gnm
>> > > Version: 1.1-1-2
>> > > Severity: serious
>> > > Tags: sid bookworm
>> > > X-Debbugs-CC: debian...@lists.debian.org
>> > > User: debian...@lists.debian.org
>> > > Usertags: needs-update
>> > > 
>> > > Dear Maintainer,
>> > > 
>> > > Since the upload of lapack 3.10.0-1, the autopkgtest of r-cran-gnm
>> > > fails in unstable. See for example:
>> > > https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/unstable/amd64/r/r-cran-gnm/15155026/log.gz
>> > > 
>> > > More precisely, test-biplot.R fails, because some results have the
>> > > opposite sign compared to the one which is expected.
>> > > 
>> > > My understanding is that this comes from the SVD of barleyMatrix in
>> > > that test file, which is different between lapack 3.9 and 3.10.
>> > > Mathematically, the SVD is not unique, and lapack 3.10 returns a
>> > > different (still valid) solution. More precisely, I verified that one
>> > > of the right-singular vector of that matrix has the opposite sign in
>> > > lapack 3.10. I also verified that the decomposition is correct by
>> > > checking that:
>> > > 
>> > >   max(abs(barleySVD$u %*% diag(barleySVD$d) %*% t(barleySVD$v) - 
>> > > barleyMatrix))
>> > > 
>> > > is a small value (about 2e-14).
>> > > 
>> > > Also note that the hardcoded expected values already partially differ 
>> > > from those of the original research paper mentioned in that test
>> > > (Gabriel (1998): Generalised bilinear regression). More precisely, half
>> > > of the values were hardcoded with the opposite sign. It seems that now
>> > > all values need to be hardcoded with the opposite sign.
>> > > 
>> > > The testsuite of r-cran-gnm thus needs to be adapted, by being more
>> > > tolerant to such sign changes.
>> > > 
>> > > N.B. : when trying to reproduce the problem, please ensure that your
>> > > lapack alternative (as given by “update-alternatives --display
>> > > liblapack.so.3-x86_64-linux-gnu) points to /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-
>> > > gnu/lapack/liblapack.so.3, and not to the binary provided by either
>> > > openblas or atlas (because these two have not yet been recompiled
>> > > against lapack 3.10, and thus do not expose the problem).
>> > > 
>> > > Best regards,
>> > > 
>> > > -- 
>> > > ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀  Sébastien Villemot
>> > > ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  Debian Developer
>> > > ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀  https://sebastien.villemot.name
>> > > ⠈⠳⣄  https://www.debian.org
>> > > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > > ___
>> > > R-pkg-team mailing list
>> > > r-pkg-t...@alioth-lists.debian.net
>> > > https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r-pkg-team
>> > 
>> > 
>> > -- 
>> > http://fam-tille.de
>
> -- 
> ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀  Sébastien Villemot
> ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  Debian Developer
> ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀  https://sebastien.villemot.name
> ⠈⠳⣄  https://www.debian.org
>
>
> Attachments:
> * lapack-3.10.patch
> * signature.asc



Bug#994457: r-cran-gnm autopkgtest needs to be adapted for lapack 3.10

2021-10-11 Thread Sébastien Villemot
Dear Heather,

Please find attached the patch that I am going to apply to r-cran-gnm
in Debian.

With this patch applied, the test now works with both lapack 3.9 and
3.10.

Feel free to use it (or not) for the next release of gnm.

Best wishes,

Le lundi 27 septembre 2021 à 12:01 +0100, Heather Turner a écrit :
> Hi Andreas,
> 
> Thanks for forwarding this bug report and thanks to Sébastien for the 
> detailed and accurate analysis. I will need to submit an update to CRAN, 
> which should be feasible in the next week or two. Is there a deadline that I 
> need to work to?
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Heather
> 
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2021, at 10:12 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > Control: tags -1 upstream
> > Control: forwarded -1 Heather Turner 
> > 
> > Hi Heather,
> > 
> > the Debian packaged gnm recieved a bug report about a failing test in
> > connection with the upgrade to lapack 3.10.0 on the machine running the
> > test.  Please read the bug report below.
> > 
> > We admit we need your help to solve this issue that might affect
> > other systems as well.
> > 
> > Kind regards
> > 
> > Andreas.
> > 
> > On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 10:59:19AM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> > > Package: r-cran-gnm
> > > Version: 1.1-1-2
> > > Severity: serious
> > > Tags: sid bookworm
> > > X-Debbugs-CC: debian...@lists.debian.org
> > > User: debian...@lists.debian.org
> > > Usertags: needs-update
> > > 
> > > Dear Maintainer,
> > > 
> > > Since the upload of lapack 3.10.0-1, the autopkgtest of r-cran-gnm
> > > fails in unstable. See for example:
> > > https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/unstable/amd64/r/r-cran-gnm/15155026/log.gz
> > > 
> > > More precisely, test-biplot.R fails, because some results have the
> > > opposite sign compared to the one which is expected.
> > > 
> > > My understanding is that this comes from the SVD of barleyMatrix in
> > > that test file, which is different between lapack 3.9 and 3.10.
> > > Mathematically, the SVD is not unique, and lapack 3.10 returns a
> > > different (still valid) solution. More precisely, I verified that one
> > > of the right-singular vector of that matrix has the opposite sign in
> > > lapack 3.10. I also verified that the decomposition is correct by
> > > checking that:
> > > 
> > >   max(abs(barleySVD$u %*% diag(barleySVD$d) %*% t(barleySVD$v) - 
> > > barleyMatrix))
> > > 
> > > is a small value (about 2e-14).
> > > 
> > > Also note that the hardcoded expected values already partially differ 
> > > from those of the original research paper mentioned in that test
> > > (Gabriel (1998): Generalised bilinear regression). More precisely, half
> > > of the values were hardcoded with the opposite sign. It seems that now
> > > all values need to be hardcoded with the opposite sign.
> > > 
> > > The testsuite of r-cran-gnm thus needs to be adapted, by being more
> > > tolerant to such sign changes.
> > > 
> > > N.B. : when trying to reproduce the problem, please ensure that your
> > > lapack alternative (as given by “update-alternatives --display
> > > liblapack.so.3-x86_64-linux-gnu) points to /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-
> > > gnu/lapack/liblapack.so.3, and not to the binary provided by either
> > > openblas or atlas (because these two have not yet been recompiled
> > > against lapack 3.10, and thus do not expose the problem).
> > > 
> > > Best regards,
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀  Sébastien Villemot
> > > ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  Debian Developer
> > > ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀  https://sebastien.villemot.name
> > > ⠈⠳⣄  https://www.debian.org
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > ___
> > > R-pkg-team mailing list
> > > r-pkg-t...@alioth-lists.debian.net
> > > https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r-pkg-team
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > http://fam-tille.de

-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀  Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀  https://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄  https://www.debian.org

Description: Fix test-biplot.R with lapack 3.10
 With lapack 3.10, test-biplot.R fails, because some results have the
 opposite sign compared to the one which is expected.
 .
 This comes from the SVD of barleyMatrix in that test file, which is different
 between lapack 3.9 and 3.10. Mathematically, the SVD is not unique, and lapack
 3.10 returns a different (still valid) solution.
 .
 This patch accomodates sign differences in the columns of the test matrices,
 so that the test passes with both lapack 3.9 and lapack 3.10.
Author: Sébastien Villemot 
Bug-Debian: https://bugs.debian.org/994457
Forwarded: no
Last-Update: 2021-10-11
---
This patch header follows DEP-3: http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep3/
--- a/tests/testthat/test-biplot.R
+++ b/tests/testthat/test-biplot.R
@@ -6,6 +6,15 @@ set.seed(1)
 
 # Gabriel, K R (1998). Generalised bilinear regression. Biometrika 85, 689–700.
 
+expect_equivalent_up_to_column_sign <- function(A, B)
+{
+  ok <- nrow(A) == nrow(B) && ncol(A) == ncol(B)
+  if (ok)
+for (j in 1:ncol(A))
+  ok <- ok && (all(A[,j] == B[,j]) || all(A[,j] == 

Bug#994457: r-cran-gnm autopkgtest needs to be adapted for lapack 3.10

2021-09-27 Thread Andreas Tille
Hi Heather,

thanks a lot for your quick response.  We do not have any deadline since
Debian 11 was "just" released.

Kind regards

 Andreas.


On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 12:01:20PM +0100, Heather Turner wrote:
> Hi Andreas,
> 
> Thanks for forwarding this bug report and thanks to Sébastien for the 
> detailed and accurate analysis. I will need to submit an update to CRAN, 
> which should be feasible in the next week or two. Is there a deadline that I 
> need to work to?
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Heather
> 
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2021, at 10:12 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > Control: tags -1 upstream
> > Control: forwarded -1 Heather Turner 
> >
> > Hi Heather,
> >
> > the Debian packaged gnm recieved a bug report about a failing test in
> > connection with the upgrade to lapack 3.10.0 on the machine running the
> > test.  Please read the bug report below.
> >
> > We admit we need your help to solve this issue that might affect
> > other systems as well.
> >
> > Kind regards
> >
> > Andreas.
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 10:59:19AM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> >> Package: r-cran-gnm
> >> Version: 1.1-1-2
> >> Severity: serious
> >> Tags: sid bookworm
> >> X-Debbugs-CC: debian...@lists.debian.org
> >> User: debian...@lists.debian.org
> >> Usertags: needs-update
> >> 
> >> Dear Maintainer,
> >> 
> >> Since the upload of lapack 3.10.0-1, the autopkgtest of r-cran-gnm
> >> fails in unstable. See for example:
> >> https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/unstable/amd64/r/r-cran-gnm/15155026/log.gz
> >> 
> >> More precisely, test-biplot.R fails, because some results have the
> >> opposite sign compared to the one which is expected.
> >> 
> >> My understanding is that this comes from the SVD of barleyMatrix in
> >> that test file, which is different between lapack 3.9 and 3.10.
> >> Mathematically, the SVD is not unique, and lapack 3.10 returns a
> >> different (still valid) solution. More precisely, I verified that one
> >> of the right-singular vector of that matrix has the opposite sign in
> >> lapack 3.10. I also verified that the decomposition is correct by
> >> checking that:
> >> 
> >>   max(abs(barleySVD$u %*% diag(barleySVD$d) %*% t(barleySVD$v) - 
> >> barleyMatrix))
> >> 
> >> is a small value (about 2e-14).
> >> 
> >> Also note that the hardcoded expected values already partially differ 
> >> from those of the original research paper mentioned in that test
> >> (Gabriel (1998): Generalised bilinear regression). More precisely, half
> >> of the values were hardcoded with the opposite sign. It seems that now
> >> all values need to be hardcoded with the opposite sign.
> >> 
> >> The testsuite of r-cran-gnm thus needs to be adapted, by being more
> >> tolerant to such sign changes.
> >> 
> >> N.B. : when trying to reproduce the problem, please ensure that your
> >> lapack alternative (as given by “update-alternatives --display
> >> liblapack.so.3-x86_64-linux-gnu) points to /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-
> >> gnu/lapack/liblapack.so.3, and not to the binary provided by either
> >> openblas or atlas (because these two have not yet been recompiled
> >> against lapack 3.10, and thus do not expose the problem).
> >> 
> >> Best regards,
> >> 
> >> -- 
> >> ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀  Sébastien Villemot
> >> ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  Debian Developer
> >> ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀  https://sebastien.villemot.name
> >> ⠈⠳⣄  https://www.debian.org
> >> 
> >
> >
> >
> >> ___
> >> R-pkg-team mailing list
> >> r-pkg-t...@alioth-lists.debian.net
> >> https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r-pkg-team
> >
> >
> > -- 
> > http://fam-tille.de
> 

-- 
http://fam-tille.de



Bug#994457: r-cran-gnm autopkgtest needs to be adapted for lapack 3.10

2021-09-27 Thread Heather Turner
Hi Andreas,

Thanks for forwarding this bug report and thanks to Sébastien for the detailed 
and accurate analysis. I will need to submit an update to CRAN, which should be 
feasible in the next week or two. Is there a deadline that I need to work to?

Best wishes,

Heather

On Mon, Sep 27, 2021, at 10:12 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Control: tags -1 upstream
> Control: forwarded -1 Heather Turner 
>
> Hi Heather,
>
> the Debian packaged gnm recieved a bug report about a failing test in
> connection with the upgrade to lapack 3.10.0 on the machine running the
> test.  Please read the bug report below.
>
> We admit we need your help to solve this issue that might affect
> other systems as well.
>
> Kind regards
>
> Andreas.
>
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 10:59:19AM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
>> Package: r-cran-gnm
>> Version: 1.1-1-2
>> Severity: serious
>> Tags: sid bookworm
>> X-Debbugs-CC: debian...@lists.debian.org
>> User: debian...@lists.debian.org
>> Usertags: needs-update
>> 
>> Dear Maintainer,
>> 
>> Since the upload of lapack 3.10.0-1, the autopkgtest of r-cran-gnm
>> fails in unstable. See for example:
>> https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/unstable/amd64/r/r-cran-gnm/15155026/log.gz
>> 
>> More precisely, test-biplot.R fails, because some results have the
>> opposite sign compared to the one which is expected.
>> 
>> My understanding is that this comes from the SVD of barleyMatrix in
>> that test file, which is different between lapack 3.9 and 3.10.
>> Mathematically, the SVD is not unique, and lapack 3.10 returns a
>> different (still valid) solution. More precisely, I verified that one
>> of the right-singular vector of that matrix has the opposite sign in
>> lapack 3.10. I also verified that the decomposition is correct by
>> checking that:
>> 
>>   max(abs(barleySVD$u %*% diag(barleySVD$d) %*% t(barleySVD$v) - 
>> barleyMatrix))
>> 
>> is a small value (about 2e-14).
>> 
>> Also note that the hardcoded expected values already partially differ 
>> from those of the original research paper mentioned in that test
>> (Gabriel (1998): Generalised bilinear regression). More precisely, half
>> of the values were hardcoded with the opposite sign. It seems that now
>> all values need to be hardcoded with the opposite sign.
>> 
>> The testsuite of r-cran-gnm thus needs to be adapted, by being more
>> tolerant to such sign changes.
>> 
>> N.B. : when trying to reproduce the problem, please ensure that your
>> lapack alternative (as given by “update-alternatives --display
>> liblapack.so.3-x86_64-linux-gnu) points to /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-
>> gnu/lapack/liblapack.so.3, and not to the binary provided by either
>> openblas or atlas (because these two have not yet been recompiled
>> against lapack 3.10, and thus do not expose the problem).
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> 
>> -- 
>> ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀  Sébastien Villemot
>> ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  Debian Developer
>> ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀  https://sebastien.villemot.name
>> ⠈⠳⣄  https://www.debian.org
>> 
>
>
>
>> ___
>> R-pkg-team mailing list
>> r-pkg-t...@alioth-lists.debian.net
>> https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r-pkg-team
>
>
> -- 
> http://fam-tille.de



Processed: Re: Bug#994457: r-cran-gnm autopkgtest needs to be adapted for lapack 3.10

2021-09-27 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands:

> tags -1 upstream
Bug #994457 [r-cran-gnm] r-cran-gnm autopkgtest needs to be adapted for lapack 
3.10
Added tag(s) upstream.
> forwarded -1 Heather Turner 
Bug #994457 [r-cran-gnm] r-cran-gnm autopkgtest needs to be adapted for lapack 
3.10
Set Bug forwarded-to-address to 'Heather Turner '.

-- 
994457: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=994457
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems



Bug#994457: r-cran-gnm autopkgtest needs to be adapted for lapack 3.10

2021-09-27 Thread Andreas Tille
Control: tags -1 upstream
Control: forwarded -1 Heather Turner 

Hi Heather,

the Debian packaged gnm recieved a bug report about a failing test in
connection with the upgrade to lapack 3.10.0 on the machine running the
test.  Please read the bug report below.

We admit we need your help to solve this issue that might affect
other systems as well.

Kind regards

Andreas.

On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 10:59:19AM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> Package: r-cran-gnm
> Version: 1.1-1-2
> Severity: serious
> Tags: sid bookworm
> X-Debbugs-CC: debian...@lists.debian.org
> User: debian...@lists.debian.org
> Usertags: needs-update
> 
> Dear Maintainer,
> 
> Since the upload of lapack 3.10.0-1, the autopkgtest of r-cran-gnm
> fails in unstable. See for example:
> https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/unstable/amd64/r/r-cran-gnm/15155026/log.gz
> 
> More precisely, test-biplot.R fails, because some results have the
> opposite sign compared to the one which is expected.
> 
> My understanding is that this comes from the SVD of barleyMatrix in
> that test file, which is different between lapack 3.9 and 3.10.
> Mathematically, the SVD is not unique, and lapack 3.10 returns a
> different (still valid) solution. More precisely, I verified that one
> of the right-singular vector of that matrix has the opposite sign in
> lapack 3.10. I also verified that the decomposition is correct by
> checking that:
> 
>   max(abs(barleySVD$u %*% diag(barleySVD$d) %*% t(barleySVD$v) - 
> barleyMatrix))
> 
> is a small value (about 2e-14).
> 
> Also note that the hardcoded expected values already partially differ 
> from those of the original research paper mentioned in that test
> (Gabriel (1998): Generalised bilinear regression). More precisely, half
> of the values were hardcoded with the opposite sign. It seems that now
> all values need to be hardcoded with the opposite sign.
> 
> The testsuite of r-cran-gnm thus needs to be adapted, by being more
> tolerant to such sign changes.
> 
> N.B. : when trying to reproduce the problem, please ensure that your
> lapack alternative (as given by “update-alternatives --display
> liblapack.so.3-x86_64-linux-gnu) points to /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-
> gnu/lapack/liblapack.so.3, and not to the binary provided by either
> openblas or atlas (because these two have not yet been recompiled
> against lapack 3.10, and thus do not expose the problem).
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> -- 
> ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀  Sébastien Villemot
> ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  Debian Developer
> ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀  https://sebastien.villemot.name
> ⠈⠳⣄  https://www.debian.org
> 



> ___
> R-pkg-team mailing list
> r-pkg-t...@alioth-lists.debian.net
> https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r-pkg-team


-- 
http://fam-tille.de



Processed: Re: Bug#994457: r-cran-gnm autopkgtest needs to be adapted for lapack 3.10

2021-09-16 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands:

> tags -1 help
Bug #994457 [r-cran-gnm] r-cran-gnm autopkgtest needs to be adapted for lapack 
3.10
Added tag(s) help.

-- 
994457: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=994457
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems



Bug#994457: r-cran-gnm autopkgtest needs to be adapted for lapack 3.10

2021-09-16 Thread Andreas Tille
Control: tags -1 help

Hi Sébastien,

thanks a lot for the bug report.

On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 10:59:19AM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> 
> The testsuite of r-cran-gnm thus needs to be adapted, by being more
> tolerant to such sign changes.

Given that you dived into that issue deep enough to possibly know what
needs to be done I'd be super happy if you could provide a patch.  If
you don't have time for it I'd just forward the issue upstream since my
time slices for R packages are *way* exhausted after BioConductor
transition and *lots* of after-freeze updates which are not yet done and
leave several open problems for the moment.

Kind regards

 Andreas.

-- 
http://fam-tille.de



Bug#994457: r-cran-gnm autopkgtest needs to be adapted for lapack 3.10

2021-09-16 Thread Sébastien Villemot
Package: r-cran-gnm
Version: 1.1-1-2
Severity: serious
Tags: sid bookworm
X-Debbugs-CC: debian...@lists.debian.org
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: needs-update

Dear Maintainer,

Since the upload of lapack 3.10.0-1, the autopkgtest of r-cran-gnm
fails in unstable. See for example:
https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/unstable/amd64/r/r-cran-gnm/15155026/log.gz

More precisely, test-biplot.R fails, because some results have the
opposite sign compared to the one which is expected.

My understanding is that this comes from the SVD of barleyMatrix in
that test file, which is different between lapack 3.9 and 3.10.
Mathematically, the SVD is not unique, and lapack 3.10 returns a
different (still valid) solution. More precisely, I verified that one
of the right-singular vector of that matrix has the opposite sign in
lapack 3.10. I also verified that the decomposition is correct by
checking that:

  max(abs(barleySVD$u %*% diag(barleySVD$d) %*% t(barleySVD$v) - barleyMatrix))

is a small value (about 2e-14).

Also note that the hardcoded expected values already partially differ 
from those of the original research paper mentioned in that test
(Gabriel (1998): Generalised bilinear regression). More precisely, half
of the values were hardcoded with the opposite sign. It seems that now
all values need to be hardcoded with the opposite sign.

The testsuite of r-cran-gnm thus needs to be adapted, by being more
tolerant to such sign changes.

N.B. : when trying to reproduce the problem, please ensure that your
lapack alternative (as given by “update-alternatives --display
liblapack.so.3-x86_64-linux-gnu) points to /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-
gnu/lapack/liblapack.so.3, and not to the binary provided by either
openblas or atlas (because these two have not yet been recompiled
against lapack 3.10, and thus do not expose the problem).

Best regards,

-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀  Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀  https://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄  https://www.debian.org



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part