Hi Graham,
On Thu, Apr 24, 2025 at 08:28:16AM +, Graham Inggs wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Apr 2025 at 12:04, Graham Inggs wrote:
> > I'd prefer MIchael to go ahead with 2024.05.001-2 to unstable, but I'm
> > also happy to upload 2022.11.001-4 which I was working on previously.
>
> I'll assume you ar
Hi Michael
On Sat, 12 Apr 2025 at 12:04, Graham Inggs wrote:
> I'd prefer MIchael to go ahead with 2024.05.001-2 to unstable, but I'm
> also happy to upload 2022.11.001-4 which I was working on previously.
I'll assume you are not working on uploading 2024.05.001-2 to unstable.
I should have tim
Hi Santiago and Michael
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 at 00:03, Santiago Vila wrote:
> If it's a matter of uploading the current version in experimental
> to unstable, I'd prefer Graham to do it, since he is the one who
> authored the experimental versions.
No, that was Michael. I did look at uploading 2
notfixed 1057556 2022.11.001-3
thanks
Hi. I'm marking this as notfixed in unstable because the current
fix was for OpenMPI 4 and does not work anymore with OpenMPI 5.
Several months ago Graham asked me not to touch the package
because he was going to work on it, so I did not touch it.
I know th
Control: owner -1 !
On Fri, 31 May 2024 14:46:28 +0200 Santiago Vila
wrote:> Instead of patch-2.txt and patch-3.txt, the following more
simple patch
would also fix the issue (I've tested it on single-cpu systems and also
on m6a.large instances from AWS, which have 1 core and two threads).
(S
Hello.
Instead of patch-2.txt and patch-3.txt, the following more simple patch
would also fix the issue (I've tested it on single-cpu systems and also
on m6a.large instances from AWS, which have 1 core and two threads).
(Suggested by Drew Parsons in Bug#1071722, which is similar to this one).
(
tags 1057556 + patch
thanks
Hello.
This is my proposal to fix this bug, but it needs some review.
(Side note: I see "Running tests with matrix size" in the build log,
so not sure if the ${TEST_FLAGS% *} thing is correct).
In summary: We run "mpiexec -n 2 true" first as a test
to ensure that th
Hi,
On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 02:50:40PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> El 11/12/23 a las 14:08, Michael Banck escribió:
> > So you are building elpa on a machine/vm with one cpu/vcore apparently?
>
> No. In this case the build was made on an AWS machine of type m6a.large,
> which has 2 vcores. I'm
El 11/12/23 a las 14:50, Santiago Vila escribió:
Alternatively, if the number "2" at the end of the debian/rules
line saying "export TEST_FLAGS=200 12 2" is the number of vcores
requested for the tests, then the package should probably honor
DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=parallel=n so that no more vcores tha
El 11/12/23 a las 14:08, Michael Banck escribió:
So you are building elpa on a machine/vm with one cpu/vcore apparently?
No. In this case the build was made on an AWS machine of type m6a.large,
which has 2 vcores. I'm usually including the machine type in the hostname,
so that it may be found i
severity 1057556 normal
retitle 1057556 elpa: FTBFS unless machine has more than one vcore
thanks
Hi Santiago,
On Tue, Dec 05, 2023 at 11:05:01PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Package: src:elpa
> Version: 2022.11.001-2
> Severity: serious
> Tags: ftbfs
>
> Dear maintainer:
>
> During a rebuild
Package: src:elpa
Version: 2022.11.001-2
Severity: serious
Tags: ftbfs
Dear maintainer:
During a rebuild of all packages in unstable, your package failed to build:
[...]
debian/rules build
dh build --max-parallel=
12 matches
Mail list logo
