On 2018-02-09 09:21, Sebastian Wouters wrote:
> Dear Aaron,
>
> To be honest, I haven't got the fogiest.
>
> On other architectures, it works fine. And test5 hasn't been individually
> changed since v1.8 was released (24 Aug 2016):
>
>
Hi Michael,
> Yeah, unfortunately, mipsel is not the most stable architecture. I am
> not sure what we should do here, we can either agressively retry to
> build on mipsel until all tests pass or alternatively ignore test
> failures. I don't think it would be easy to just ignore them on mipsel,
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 09:26:25AM +0100, Sebastian Wouters wrote:
> First one:
>
> Test project /<>/obj-mipsel-linux-gnu
> Start 3: test3
> 1/3 Test #3: test3 Passed8.10 sec
> Start 5: test5
> 2/3 Test #5: test5
Dear Aaron,
Of the three build logs [1]:
First one:
Test project /<>/obj-mipsel-linux-gnu
Start 3: test3
1/3 Test #3: test3 Passed8.10 sec
Start 5: test5
2/3 Test #5: test5 ***Exception: SegFault 9.37
sec
Start 8: test8
Dear Aaron,
To be honest, I haven't got the fogiest.
On other architectures, it works fine. And test5 hasn't been individually
changed since v1.8 was released (24 Aug 2016):
https://github.com/SebWouters/CheMPS2/commits/master/tests/test5.cpp.in
https://github.com/SebWouters/CheMPS2/releases
Source: chemps2
Version: 1.8.5-1
Severity: serious
Tags: upstream
Justification: fails to build from source (but built successfully in the past)
User: debian-m...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: mipsel
Builds of chemps2 1.8.5 for mipsel have been failing:
cd obj-mipsel-linux-gnu/ && ctest -R
6 matches
Mail list logo
