Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!fu-berlin.de!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: Diane Trout Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python Subject: Re: llvmlite, numba, and llvm versions Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 07:20:01 +0100 Message-ID: References: X-Original-To: PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Wed Mar 19 06:13:15 2025 Old-Return-Path: X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.561 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SARE_MSGID_LONG40=0.637] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Policyd-Weight: using cached result; rate: -4.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.55.3-1 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/22934 List-ID: List-URL: List-Archive: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/f36b4a5f8d80d710e0d5f39f195258138c3fa644.camel@ghic.org Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 23 Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Cc: "M. Zhou" , Debian Python X-Original-Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 23:12:51 -0700 X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-References: <128a5dff67746a5120e3ab36650282b267a3652d.camel@ghic.org> <72bed1ba95bd940566166a7293f4cf28e97b559d.camel@ghic.org> <1933379077.79668301.1742303307218.JavaMail.zimbra@synchrotron-soleil.fr> Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:16814 On Tue, 2025-03-18 at 14:08 +0100, PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel wrote: > >=20 >=20 > some news ? >=20 > friendly ping :)) I was waiting to see if I could get some advice from upstream. I added a bit more to the upstream bug about what's different between llvm 15 and 19 for one of the failing test. https://github.com/numba/llvmlite/pull/1092 I pushed my backport of the llvm-19 patch and general package updates to llvm-19 to https://salsa.debian.org/diane/llvmlite This currently has a patch to mark the two failing tests as "expectedFailures" because I thought it'd be useful to take this build and see how well numba works with it. Diane