Beta 2 works as expected with GEOSwift.
Sent via Superhuman ( https://sprh.mn/?vip=andrew.d.hershber...@gmail.com )
On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 3:24 PM, Paul Ramsey < pram...@cleverelephant.ca >
wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>> On Jun 15, 2023, at 12:18 PM, Sean Gillies < sean. gillies@ gmail. com (
>>
> On Jun 15, 2023, at 12:08 PM, Roger Bivand wrote:
>
> Paul, will try tomorrow morning my time. Does this 3.11 contain the fix for
> gcc 13 - I had to switch to devel on upgrading to Fedora 38 so if that commit
> is also present here, it should be feasible, if not rather harder.
There are
> On Jun 15, 2023, at 12:18 PM, Sean Gillies wrote:
>
> The GEOSMinimumRotatedEnvelope algorithm change affects some Shapely tests,
> but I don't see any other problems. We're likely to change the tests to match
> the new implementation.
Super! Yes, this new implementation is “different but
Hi Paul,
The GEOSMinimumRotatedEnvelope algorithm change affects some Shapely tests,
but I don't see any other problems. We're likely to change the tests to
match the new implementation.
Beta2 looks good from here!
On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 2:01 PM Paul Ramsey
wrote:
> Thank you everyone who
Paul, will try tomorrow morning my time. Does this 3.11 contain the fix for gcc
13 - I had to switch to devel on upgrading to Fedora 38 so if that commit is
also present here, it should be feasible, if not rather harder.
Roger
--
Roger Bivand
Emeritus Professor
Norwegian School of Economics
"Regina Obe" writes:
>> On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 6:30 AM Greg Troxel wrote:
>>
>> > Looking at the logs (at end), overall this smells like either a
>> > systematic issue where the floating point on my system is broken, or
>> > there is some slight floating point difference from x86, and geos
>>
> On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 6:30 AM Greg Troxel wrote:
>
> > Looking at the logs (at end), overall this smells like either a
> > systematic issue where the floating point on my system is broken, or
> > there is some slight floating point difference from x86, and geos
> > tests are very sensitive
Roger, if you could check the current 3.11 branch against your tests,
that would be very helpful.
https://github.com/libgeos/geos/tree/3.11
There is a patch in there for an issue that appeared in some very rare
cases in PostGIS that I think might be an issue in your use cases, and
I'd like to
On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 6:30 AM Greg Troxel wrote:
> Looking at the logs (at end), overall this smells like either a
> systematic issue where the floating point on my system is broken, or
> there is some slight floating point difference from x86, and geos tests
> are very sensitive to exact FP
I have no clear memory of whether I ever tried to build geos or run
tests on RPI3 before. I have a very very vague memory of having trouble
and never having chased it down. So I am definitely not asking that the
release be held for this!
>
This is of course not a request to hold the release; just a comment on
something that I don't yet understand. I am able to run tests by
installing the just built geos and then running them.
The plot thickens on the meta test issues. I built on RPI3 under
NetBSD; geos had not been previously
11 matches
Mail list logo
