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

Fix build and doctest issues for Solaris 10 (SPARC) in 32-bit mode. #8409

Closed
sagetrac-drkirkby mannequin opened this issue Mar 1, 2010 · 8 comments
Closed

Fix build and doctest issues for Solaris 10 (SPARC) in 32-bit mode. #8409

sagetrac-drkirkby mannequin opened this issue Mar 1, 2010 · 8 comments

Comments

@sagetrac-drkirkby
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-drkirkby mannequin commented Mar 1, 2010

As of Sage 4.3.3, Sage will not build on Solaris 10 (SPARC). This lists all the items which I'm aware are needed to allow Sage to build, and pass all then normal doctests, excluding the long ones.

== Hardware used for testing ==

Since 't2' is rather slow, a somewhat ancient and low-spec Sun Blade 1000 was used for these tests.

  • Sun Blade 1000
  • 2 x 900 MHz UltraSPARC III+ CPUs
  • 2 GB RAM
  • Solaris 10 03/2005 (first release of Solaris 10)
  • gcc 4.4.3 (uses Sun linker and assembler)

== Patches needed to build Sage 4.4.3 on Solaris 10 (SPARC) ==

Sage will not build without all of the following patches.

== Patches needed for Sage to pass all the normal (not long) doctests ==

== Long doctests ==

All long doctests pass, with the exception of the following, which is #8416

sage -t  -long "devel/sage/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_modular_symbols.py"
A mysterious error (perhaps a memory error?) occurred, which may have crashed doctest.
         [3.0 s]

== Other changes ==

It was necessary to increase SAGE_TIMEOUT. The longest test is taking 460 s on the Blade 1000. Despite the relative age and cost of the T5240 (t2) and my Blade 1000 (redstart), the T5240 is designed for a very different task to what it is used for, so some of the doctests will take longer on 't2'. I would suggest a minimum timeout of 2000 s would be necessary to be sure of no failures due to the lack of speed in 't2'.

Although I did increase SAGE_TIMEOUT_LONG to 10000 s from the default 1800, this was no absolutely necessary, as all tests completed in less than 1800 s, although the longest took 1764.9 s, so would have been very close to timing out.

Dave

CC: @sagetrac-mvngu

Component: porting: Solaris

Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/8409

@sagetrac-drkirkby sagetrac-drkirkby mannequin added this to the sage-4.4 milestone Mar 1, 2010
@sagetrac-drkirkby sagetrac-drkirkby mannequin self-assigned this Mar 1, 2010
@sagetrac-drkirkby

This comment has been minimized.

@sagetrac-drkirkby
Copy link
Mannequin Author

sagetrac-drkirkby mannequin commented Mar 3, 2010

comment:3

As reported at #8416 this doctest pass after I rebuilt the Sage library completely. So I believe all doctests should now pass on Solaris 10 - including the long ones.

We will have to wait and see.

@jhpalmieri
Copy link
Member

comment:4

As of 4.4.alpha1 or alpha2, there are several long doctests which still fail on t2:

        sage -t  -long devel/sage/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/BSD.py # 2 doctests failed
        sage -t  -long devel/sage/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_curve_isogeny.py # File not found
        sage -t  -long devel/sage/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # File not found
        sage -t  -long devel/sage/sage/modular/ssmod/ssmod.py # File not found
        sage -t  -long devel/sage/sage/categories/coxeter_groups.py # File not found

All but the first are timeouts; I'll increase SAGE_TIMEOUT_LONG and see what happens. I don't know what causes the first; I'll open a ticket: #8749.

As it stands, I'm not sure what we can do about this ticket, so I'm pushing it to Sage 5.0.

@jhpalmieri jhpalmieri modified the milestones: sage-4.4, sage-5.0 Apr 23, 2010
@jhpalmieri
Copy link
Member

comment:5

With longer SAGE_TIMEOUT_LONG, tests pass:

sage -t  -long devel/sage/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_curve_isogeny.py
         [2238.6 s]
sage -t  -long devel/sage/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py
         [3010.0 s]
sage -t  -long devel/sage/sage/modular/ssmod/ssmod.py
         [2336.2 s]
sage -t  -long devel/sage/sage/categories/coxeter_groups.py
         [3101.2 s]

except for the ones tracked at #8749 and #8750.

@jhpalmieri
Copy link
Member

comment:6

Once #8749 is fixed, can we close this?

@jhpalmieri jhpalmieri modified the milestones: sage-5.0, sage-4.4.1 Apr 27, 2010
@williamstein
Copy link
Contributor

comment:7

Note a 4.4.3 blocker.

@williamstein williamstein modified the milestones: sage-4.4.3, sage-5.0 Jun 3, 2010
@sagetrac-drkirkby
Copy link
Mannequin Author

sagetrac-drkirkby mannequin commented Jun 5, 2010

comment:9

As of sage 4.4.4, #9127 is the only outstanding doctest issue and that would appear to be related to the low speed of the machines used to perform a test - it creates a timeout.

Once that is fixed, this ticket can be closed.

@sagetrac-drkirkby
Copy link
Mannequin Author

sagetrac-drkirkby mannequin commented Jul 12, 2010

comment:10

This can now be closed. All issues have been resolved, and Sage certainly does build on Solaris 10 (SPARC) while passing all doc tests.

There are still issues on OpenSolaris, and when building in 64-bits, but all the 32-bit issues have been resolved. I added "in 32-bit mode" to the title, so its clear not all issues have been resolved.

#9026 tracks some of the other Solaris/OpenSolaris related issues. #9281 lists the passes and failures for SAGE_CHECK to work on OpenSolaris x64.

Dave

@sagetrac-drkirkby sagetrac-drkirkby mannequin changed the title Fix build and doctest issues for Solaris 10 (SPARC) Fix build and doctest issues for Solaris 10 (SPARC) in 32-bit mode. Jul 12, 2010
@sagetrac-drkirkby sagetrac-drkirkby mannequin closed this as completed Jul 12, 2010
@sagetrac-mvngu sagetrac-mvngu mannequin modified the milestones: sage-5.0, sage-4.5 Jul 13, 2010
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

2 participants