[PPL-devel] [Fink-devel] ppl-0.10.2 check thorough test fail

[Alexander Hansen]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 3/29/11 3:44 PM, David Fang wrote:
> Hi,
>  	Adding fink-devel.
> 
>> On 03/29/11 02:39, David Fang wrote:
>>> With ppl-0.10.2, several Mac OS X fink users (including myself) have 
>>> observed the following single test failure on 10.5 and 10.6, using Apple's 
>>> gcc-4.2, arch i686-apple-darwin{9,10}, with thorough tests enabled:
>>>
>>> /usr/bin/grep -E "^Optimum value: " ../../../demos/ppl_lpsol/expected_mpz
>>>> expected_optima && /usr/bin/grep -E "^Optimum value: " obtained 
>>>> obtained_optima && diff -u expected_optima obtained_optima
>>> --- expected_optima 2011-03-22 21:05:58.000000000 -0400
>>> +++ obtained_optima 2011-03-22 21:05:58.000000000 -0400
>>>
>>> Most fink users that reported this have built ppl against gmp-4.3.2.
>>> I tested a build against gmp-5.0.1 and got the exact same result on
>>> i686-apple-darwin10.
>>>
>>> However, the same set of tests (check thorough) pass *cleanly* on
>>> powerpc-apple-darwin8 apple-gcc-4.0.1 (ppl-0.10.2 using gmp-4.3.2),
>>> which took over 4 days to run.
>>
>> yes, `make check' is heavy.  However, our experience suggests no tests
>> in the regression test suite is really redundant.
>>
>>> Has anyone else observed this failure on this version/configuration?
>>
>> Not that I know, but it would be useful to know the compiler version
>> used.  In the (rather distant) past I remember some users had problems
>> with some Apple-modified versions of GCC.
> 
> Compiler version:
> apple-gcc-4.2.1
> configured for i686-apple-darwin10
> 
> An interesting data point we could use is powerpc-apple-darwin9-gcc-4.2.1, 
> which uses the same version compiler, but different arch.
> (Any fink-10.5/ppc volunteers willing to donate some CPU cycles to test 
> this? : "fink -m build ppl" )
> 
>>> How severe is this test failure?
>>
>> I would consider it severe, as it might indicate that the PPL has been
>> miscompiled.  This is my first suspect.  Of course, we cannot exclude
>> the cause is an architecture/compiler/platform-dependent bug in
>> PPL 0.10.2 that went undetected up to now: perhaps `git bisect' could
>> help locating it.
> 
> It is posible this was never covered earlier, in my packaging, I had to 
> apply a tiny patch to name an anonymous enum that prevented gcc-4.0.x from 
> compiling one of the headers.  At some point the documentation said 
> gcc-4.0 was not supported, but my testing on powerpc-darwin8 was 
> successful.)
> 
>>> (Unrelated note: ppl-0.11's tests run cleanly on i686-darwin10.)
>>
>> PPL 0.11.2 is the latest version of the PPL and the one we warmly
>> recommend to anyone.  If for some reason you cannot switch to PPL
>> 0.11.2, please try compiling PPL 0.10.2 with a different compiler and
>> see if the problem persists.  If it does, we may investigate other
>> possibilities.
> 
> According to Jack Howarth (on this list, I believe), gcc-4.4 depends on 
> ppl-0.10.x and is incompatible with ppl-0.11.x.
> 
> Thank you for the reply.
> 
> Fang
> 
> 
> David Fang
> http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~fang/
> http://www.achronix.com/
> 
> 

I've uploaded a build log and build directory for a darwin10/powerpc
build of ppl-0.10.2 using gcc-4.2 from Apple:

$ g++-4.2 --version
powerpc-apple-darwin9-g++-4.2.1 (GCC) 4.2.1 (Apple Inc. build 5577)

The log and build directory are at:

http://akh.users.finkproject.org/finklogs/archives/2011-03.html#e2011-03-30T09_25_26.txt

- -- 
Alexander Hansen, Ph.D.
Fink User Liaison
http://finkakh.wordpress.com/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk2TYT4ACgkQB8UpO3rKjQ8fpQCgjzJ4caeYmeshwSIE/3eWoJBz
cScAoJXYPH7thhFpa0vr0BEsLK5SPdS0
=9SJ3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----