Re: 'make check' errors

[PhilipNienhuis]

Andreas Weber-3 wrote
> Am 03.11.2013 00:16, schrieb PhilipNienhuis:
> 
>> A typical sample of what I get on Windows (MinGW) is posted in this
>> thread:
>> http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/Problems-with-the-Windows-build-tc4658593.html
>> 
>> Compared to "what we are used to on Windows" (~10 fails give or take a
>> couple) a few new FAILs came up; I suspect tolerance issues and one
>> (assert.m) is a simple case of different output format. Later this coming
>> week I'll try to look in the others.
> 
> Hi Philip,
> Are you aware of http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?32036 (3 failures in
> data.cc with MinGW)?
> 
> Can we change the status from "Need Info" to "Confirmed" and are there
> any plans to fix this?

Status -> confirmed

I had forgotten this report (though I knew about it), thanks for the
reminder.
Actually these test FAILs have been there as long as we have MinGW builds,
AFAIK. I never met issues with it but I don't often do computations with
unstable systems that could lead to NaNs/Infs etc.

Plans to fix? first we must be sure it is an Octave issue. I have the
feeling (but no more than that) it could well be an upstream issue.
A stumbling block is that there are only very few Windows developers for
Octave (I'm merely some contributor), compared to the Linux folks here (Mac
OSX is in a similar position to Windows).

The syscalls.cc and speed.m & quadgk.m FAILs are also 'traditional" MinGW
test fails.
Nitzan's 3.6.4 and 3.6.2 MinGW binaries had remarkably few FAILs, IIRC 6 or
so, only the ones mentioned here.

Philip




--
View this message in context: 
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/make-check-errors-tp4658749p4658766.html
Sent from the Octave - Maintainers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.