Summary: | media-libs/opengtl-0.9.18 fails tests | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Diego Elio Pettenò (RETIRED) <flameeyes> |
Component: | New packages | Assignee: | Gentoo KDE team <kde> |
Status: | RESOLVED CANTFIX | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | creffett, phajdan.jr |
Priority: | Normal | Keywords: | TESTFAILURE |
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Attachments: |
Build log
full test log |
Description
Diego Elio Pettenò (RETIRED)
2011-08-06 13:49:42 UTC
Created attachment 284071 [details]
full test log
Same test result for opengtl-0.9.15.2: 91% tests passed, 16 tests failed out of 172 Total Test time (real) = 33.56 sec The following tests FAILED: 149 - clamp.shiva (Failed) 158 - Gradient.shiva (Failed) 159 - MandelbrotSet.shiva (Failed) 160 - PlainGenerator.shiva (Failed) 161 - PerlinNoise.shiva (Failed) 162 - Noise.shiva (Failed) 163 - blur.shiva (Failed) 164 - copy.shiva (Failed) 165 - oilify.shiva (Failed) 166 - RawToColor.shiva (Failed) 167 - RawToGray.shiva (Failed) 168 - SimpleDemosaicing.shiva (Failed) 169 - LinearDemosaicing.shiva (Failed) 170 - PixelGroupingPass1.shiva (Failed) 171 - BimedianDemosaicing.shiva (Failed) 172 - PixelGroupingPass2.shiva (Failed) The tests seem to have in common a reference to a directory named /results{32,64}, which is defined in the root CMakeLists.txt as the variable OPENGTL_TESTS_DATA_RESULTS_DIR. It also relies on OPENGTL_TESTS_DATA "" CACHE FILEPATH "Directory that contains the data of the tests." The code in the failing tests that I looked at references, for example, ${OPENGTL_TESTS_DATA}/${OPENGTL_TESTS_DATA_RESULTS_DIR}/${TEST_FILE}.png, and since the first variable is blank, it results in the program searching for /results. Since I cannot find any directory named results* in the source or compiled output, I'm looking now to see why it's not there--maybe it's a separate download? I emailed upstream asking about the missing files, and he responded that the test files are not included in the package, because they are ~300M, and they are not presently available for download because he didn't think people would want them. Should I reply and say that we'd be interested in him making them available, or is 300M too much for some tests and should we just patch out the tests that require the files? 300MB on a different file only fetched through USE=test is fine to have. (In reply to comment #5) > 300MB on a different file only fetched through USE=test is fine to have. Sounds good. @creffet, any news from upstream? Still no response, did ping again. The person I was talking to upstream was Cyrille Berger Skott, so if anyone with a good contact wants to ask again, feel free. I also mailed upstream with no response some time ago. Also, the tests are finally restricted now. Without the files from upstream, we cannot fix this bug. |