Tested 5.0.91

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Tested 5.0.91

himpe
Dear Developers,

I compiled octave-5.0.91 on Ubuntu 18.04 with the self-compiled
library stack:

* OpenBLAS 0.3.5
* FlexiBLAS 2.0.0
* qrupdate 1.1.2
* SuiteSparse 5.4.0
* arpack-ng 3.7.0
* sundials 2.7.0

The results from make check are:

  PASS                            15368
  FAIL                                4
  XFAIL (reported bug)               23
  SKIP (missing feature)            183
  SKIP (run-time condition)          12

whereas the fails are in:

* plot/appearance/camlookat.m (1 FAIL)
* specfun/gammainc.m (3 FAILs)

I can provide the fntests.log file if needed, but I would prefer to not
send it to the mailinglist.

Best

Christian

PS: Would it make sense to try to compile with sundials-4.0.2?


--
Christian Himpe
Computational Methods in Systems and Control Theory
Max Planck Institute for Dynamics of Complex Technical Systems
Sandtorstr. 1
D-39106 Magdeburg
Germany

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tested 5.0.91

Mike Miller-4
On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 01:56:20 +0100, Christian Himpe wrote:
> I can provide the fntests.log file if needed, but I would prefer to not
> send it to the mailinglist.

Thank you for testing.

Feel free to send the log to me directly, compressed please.

> PS: Would it make sense to try to compile with sundials-4.0.2?

It would be nice, but it's not feasible at the moment. I haven't looked
at sundials 4 yet, but sundials 3 forces a particular assumption about
the suitesparse header files that breaks the way Octave currently builds
against suitesparse.

Does sundials 4 still '#include "klu.h"' in its public headers?

--
mike

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tested 5.0.91

Mike Miller-4
In reply to this post by himpe
Hi Christian,

On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 01:56:20 +0100, Christian Himpe wrote:
> I compiled octave-5.0.91 on Ubuntu 18.04 with the self-compiled
> library stack:
>
> * OpenBLAS 0.3.5
> * FlexiBLAS 2.0.0
> * qrupdate 1.1.2
> * SuiteSparse 5.4.0
> * arpack-ng 3.7.0
> * sundials 2.7.0

When you run the test suite are you using FlexiBLAS with OpenBLAS
selected? I assume so.

Is your Ubuntu system x86-64?

> whereas the fails are in:
>
> * plot/appearance/camlookat.m (1 FAIL)
> * specfun/gammainc.m (3 FAILs)

In your fntests.log file, all 4 failures are because the difference is
slightly out of the test tolerance.

I think the gammainc.m test tolerances were chosen empirically, and they
have been increased in the past (https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?53437).

Cc'ing Colin to comment on the camlookat.m test results and tolerances:

!!!!! test failed
ASSERT errors for:  assert (dir,dir2,-2 * eps)

  Location  |  Observed  |  Expected  |  Reason
    (2)        0.72803      0.72803      Rel err 4.5749e-16 exceeds tol 4.4409e-16 by 1e-17

--
mike

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tested 5.0.91

himpe
Dear Mike,

On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 20:32:37 -0800
Mike Miller <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Christian,
>
> On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 01:56:20 +0100, Christian Himpe wrote:
> > I compiled octave-5.0.91 on Ubuntu 18.04 with the self-compiled
> > library stack:
> >
> > * OpenBLAS 0.3.5
> > * FlexiBLAS 2.0.0
> > * qrupdate 1.1.2
> > * SuiteSparse 5.4.0
> > * arpack-ng 3.7.0
> > * sundials 2.7.0  
>
> When you run the test suite are you using FlexiBLAS with OpenBLAS
> selected? I assume so.
>
Yes.

> Is your Ubuntu system x86-64?
>
Yes.

> > whereas the fails are in:
> >
> > * plot/appearance/camlookat.m (1 FAIL)
> > * specfun/gammainc.m (3 FAILs)  
>
> In your fntests.log file, all 4 failures are because the difference is
> slightly out of the test tolerance.
>
> I think the gammainc.m test tolerances were chosen empirically, and
> they have been increased in the past
> (https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?53437).
>
> Cc'ing Colin to comment on the camlookat.m test results and
> tolerances:
>
> !!!!! test failed
> ASSERT errors for:  assert (dir,dir2,-2 * eps)
>
>   Location  |  Observed  |  Expected  |  Reason
>     (2)        0.72803      0.72803      Rel err 4.5749e-16 exceeds
> tol 4.4409e-16 by 1e-17
>

Sorry, I should have been more specific there.

Best

Christian


--
Christian Himpe
Computational Methods in Systems and Control Theory
Max Planck Institute for Dynamics of Complex Technical Systems
Sandtorstr. 1
D-39106 Magdeburg
Germany