Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: Nilesh Patra Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python Subject: Re: Remaining numpy 1.24 issues on 32bit architectures Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 12:40:01 +0100 Message-ID: References: X-Original-To: Andreas Tille X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Mon Jan 30 11:38:03 2023 Old-Return-Path: X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-112.49 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, MEDS2=2, MURPHY_DRUGS_REL8=0.02, PGPSIGNATURE=-5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, USER_IN_DKIM_WELCOMELIST=-0.01, USER_IN_DKIM_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Organization: The Debian Project MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="kiswc7gigg4jjpxk" Content-Disposition: inline X-Debian-User: nilesh X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/20758 List-ID: List-URL: List-Archive: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/20230130113737.3pi35wrnnlvhy32u@nileshpatra.info Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 71 Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Cc: Debian Med Project List , Debian Python X-Original-Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 17:07:37 +0530 X-Original-Message-ID: <20230130113737.3pi35wrnnlvhy32u@nileshpatra.info> X-Original-References: Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:14872 --kiswc7gigg4jjpxk Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 09:12:57AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > I made some tiny steps forward ("only" 84 failures instead of 89 when I > wrote my first mail) in the numpy 1.24 migration for 32bit architectures > but I'm facing issues I do not have a real clue for. In >=20 > https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/python-skbio/-/blob/master/debian/pa= tches/numpy-1.24.patch#L123-L126 Apologies for pointing the discussion into an orthogonal direction for once. Ofcourse, we could try fixing these, but if you look closely, skbio has never built on 32 bit archs ever since around 2016 on i386[3] and it has never built on the rest of 32 bit ever since it entered debian[4] and now this new upstream FTBFS that you point to, won't really block migration in any way. So my question is this: Why are we trying hard to fix this on 32-bit _now_ given that the upstream support has never been solid for this package on 32-bit archs? > ... > which obviosly[2] failed. I wonder whether someone might give some > hints how to get dtypes consistently to one integer representation which > is the background of nearly all these test suite issues. I can think of two alternatives to fix this: 1. There are a few type conversions to "int" (.astype(int)) in the skbio so= urce code. This defaults to 32-bit integer type on 32-bit machines. Explicitly casting them to 64-bit can fix this. I happened to write a similar patch for another package recently, see[5] if it helps. 2. Just ignore datatypes while comparing pandas dataframes with `check_dtype` parameter. An example/reference patch here[6] > > [1] https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=3Dpython-skbio&suite= =3Dexperimental > [2] https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/python-skbio/-/jobs/3868951 [3]: https://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?pkg=3Dpython-skbio&arch=3Di3= 86 [4]:https://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?pkg=3Dpython-skbio&arch=3Darm= hf [5]: https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/python-bioframe/-/blob/master/debian= /patches/32-bits.patch [6]: https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/python-upsetplot/-/blob/= master/debian/patches/ignore-dtype-while-asserting.patch --=20 Best, Nilesh --kiswc7gigg4jjpxk Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEABYIAB0WIQSglbZu4JAkvuai8HIqJ5BL1yQ+2gUCY9esAAAKCRAqJ5BL1yQ+ 2hNZAQCKhIGuXKtqHMEmCQvLRMG64BBpxCvBEBI6AxPZMHC+TgEAoMBEqiuqgqF7 FSmfl0QTwa9ohVdwTccM11obwdzwBgQ= =VHsZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --kiswc7gigg4jjpxk--