Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

spkg-check.in: Do not use sdh_make to do 'make check', to avoid misleading messages #29501

Closed
mkoeppe opened this issue Apr 13, 2020 · 20 comments

Comments

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

mkoeppe commented Apr 13, 2020

sdh_make, even when used for make check, prints the misleading message "Error building $PKG_NAME"

$ grep sdh_make build/pkgs/*/spkg-check.in
build/pkgs/awali/spkg-check.in:sdh_make check
build/pkgs/barvinok/spkg-check.in:sdh_make check
build/pkgs/cocoalib/spkg-check.in:sdh_make check
build/pkgs/e_antic/spkg-check.in:sdh_make check
build/pkgs/fflas_ffpack/spkg-check.in:sdh_make check
build/pkgs/isl/spkg-check.in:sdh_make check
build/pkgs/openblas/spkg-check.in:sdh_make tests $OPENBLAS_CONFIGURE
build/pkgs/openblas/spkg-check.in:        sdh_make tests $OPENBLAS_CONFIGURE
build/pkgs/polylib/spkg-check.in:sdh_make check
build/pkgs/polymake/spkg-check.in:sdh_make test
build/pkgs/symengine/spkg-check.in:sdh_make test
build/pkgs/tides/spkg-check.in:sdh_make check AM_CFLAGS="" AM_FFLAGS=""

In the present ticket, we fix this.

We note that when sdh_make is used for building in spkg-install.in, there is duplication with a message printed by sage-spkg afterwards. For example in https://github.com/mkoeppe/sage/runs/581877049:

  [python3-3.7.3.p1]   TypeError: can only concatenate str (not "NoneType") to str
  [python3-3.7.3.p1]   make[2]: *** [Makefile:626: sharedmods] Error 1
  [python3-3.7.3.p1]   make[2]: Target 'all' not remade because of errors.
  [python3-3.7.3.p1]   make[2]: Leaving directory '/home/runner/work/sage/sage/.tox/local-conda-forge-ubuntu-minimal/local/var/tmp/sage/build/python3-3.7.3.p1/src'
  [python3-3.7.3.p1]   ********************************************************************************
  [python3-3.7.3.p1]   Error building python3-3.7.3.p1
  [python3-3.7.3.p1]   ********************************************************************************
  [python3-3.7.3.p1]   
  [python3-3.7.3.p1]   real	3m37.614s
  [python3-3.7.3.p1]   user	1m37.298s
  [python3-3.7.3.p1]   sys	0m11.320s
  [python3-3.7.3.p1]   ************************************************************************
  [python3-3.7.3.p1]   Error building package python3-3.7.3.p1
  [python3-3.7.3.p1]   ************************************************************************
  [python3-3.7.3.p1] Full log file: /home/runner/work/sage/sage/logs/pkgs/python3-3.7.3.p1.log

However, as this does not have the potential to mislead, we will take care of this on another ticket.

Depends on #29510

CC: @dimpase @jhpalmieri @embray

Component: build

Author: Matthias Koeppe

Branch/Commit: c53ddc7

Reviewer: Dima Pasechnik, John Palmieri

Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/29501

@mkoeppe mkoeppe added this to the sage-9.1 milestone Apr 13, 2020
@jhpalmieri
Copy link
Member

comment:1

Maybe just create a new function called sdh_make_check which is exactly the same as sdh_make but has a different error message. Or allow sdh_make to have an optional second argument, which defaults to "building".

@mkoeppe

This comment has been minimized.

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented Apr 13, 2020

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented Apr 13, 2020

New commits:

2c647fcbuild/pkgs/*/spkg-check.in: Do not print misleading error messages: avoid sdh_make

@mkoeppe

This comment has been minimized.

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented Apr 13, 2020

Commit: 2c647fc

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented Apr 14, 2020

Author: Matthias Koeppe

@mkoeppe mkoeppe changed the title spkg-check.in: Do not use sdh_make to do 'make check' spkg-check.in: Do not use sdh_make to do 'make check', to avoid misleading messages Apr 14, 2020
@dimpase
Copy link
Member

dimpase commented Apr 14, 2020

comment:7

maybe, for uniformity, not "Failures checking $PKG_NAME", but "Error checking $PKG_NAME"

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented Apr 15, 2020

comment:8

I worded it like this because if SAGE_CHECK=warn, then it is not an error but only a warning.

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Apr 18, 2020

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

67256c2Use 'failures', not 'error' when reporting testsuite failures

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Apr 18, 2020

Changed commit from 2c647fc to 67256c2

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Apr 18, 2020

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. New commits:

251ab47trac 29492: remove outdated boilerplate from spkg-install.in,
1383a59Merge branch 'u/jhpalmieri/remove-boilerplate' of git://trac.sagemath.org/sage into t/29510/spkg_check_in__remove_messages_that_duplicate_sage_spkg_s_messages
2533a67build/pkgs/*/spkg-check.in: Remove messages that duplicate sage-spkg messages
9b213a4build/bin/sage-spkg: Add message when test suite passed
ca36a87build/pkgs/*/spkg-check.in: Do not print misleading error messages: avoid sdh_make
c53ddc7Use 'failures', not 'error' when reporting testsuite failures

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Apr 18, 2020

Changed commit from 67256c2 to c53ddc7

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented Apr 18, 2020

Dependencies: #29510

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented Apr 18, 2020

comment:11

rebased on top of #29510 to remove a merge conflict

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented Apr 18, 2020

comment:12

needs review

@jhpalmieri
Copy link
Member

Reviewer: Dima Pasechnik, John Palmieri

@jhpalmieri
Copy link
Member

comment:13

Looks good to me.

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkoeppe commented Apr 18, 2020

comment:14

Thank you!

@vbraun
Copy link
Member

vbraun commented Apr 22, 2020

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants