Hi Julien, * Julien Puydt <julien.pu...@gmail.com> [2021-05-17 09:01]:
I tried to create a testing sbuild and compile sagemath 9.2-2 with it, and it worked so unless I made a mistake in my setup, something made that bug go away...Can someone independently give it a try?
I triggered reproducible-builds again: https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/rb-pkg/unstable/amd64/sagemath.html Success: 40 tests failed, up to 200 failures are tolerated Success: 5 tests failed, up to 200 failures are toleratedso not much changed comparing to two weeks ago and my conclusion still holds:
* Jochen Sprickerhof <jspri...@debian.org> [2021-05-04 13:22]:
Success: 41 tests failed, up to 200 failures are tolerated Success: 5 tests failed, up to 200 failures are tolerated The 200 is set in debian/rules: https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/sagemath/-/commit/6088e9f2abc7ae99a8d07760ceee6fb6aac7bb54and sounds a little arbitrary. Sadly the state upstream seems not to be much better:https://github.com/sagemath/sage/tree/9.2 13 failing, 17 cancelled, and 70 successful checks (I did not look into them.)So I think the question is rather if the test suite gives an appropriate view on the quality of the software. If it does, I assume it is not appropriate for a Debian stable release. Contrary if we assume the test suite being broken, we could disable it completely rather then producing random FTBFS.
Cheers Jochen
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
