1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. LINUX.DEBIAN.BUGS.RC

  • Bug#1106436: pymatgen: FTBFS: TestInterfaceReaction.test_get_entry_ener

    From Drew Parsons@21:1/5 to All on Fri May 30 22:40:01 2025
    Source: pymatgen
    Followup-For: Bug #1106436

    pymatgen tests are known to be broadly flakey.

    If you run your build test again, it will likely pass.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Santiago Vila@21:1/5 to All on Fri May 30 22:50:01 2025
    El 30/5/25 a las 22:35, Drew Parsons escribió:
    Source: pymatgen
    Followup-For: Bug #1106436

    pymatgen tests are known to be broadly flakey.

    If you run your build test again, it will likely pass.

    That's not how it works.

    By the time I get to the point of reporting a FTBFS bugs,
    I've already tried several times and it failed several times
    in a row on several different machines.

    This is my build history before I reported this one:

    Status: failed pymatgen_2025.2.18+dfsg1-4_amd64-20250524T114313.018Z Status: failed pymatgen_2025.2.18+dfsg1-4_amd64-20250524T121603.326Z Status: failed pymatgen_2025.2.18+dfsg1-4_amd64-20250524T121604.134Z Status: failed pymatgen_2025.2.18+dfsg1-4_amd64-20250524T121607.914Z Status: failed pymatgen_2025.2.18+dfsg1-4_amd64-20250524T121608.444Z Status: failed pymatgen_2025.2.18+dfsg1-4_amd64-20250524T121609.251Z

    Now, if you tell me that this is due to some build-dependency which
    has changed since 20250524, yes, I could try again, but if no build-dependency has changed, there are no reasons to expect a different result.

    Thanks.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Santiago Vila@21:1/5 to All on Fri May 30 23:30:01 2025
    tags 1106436 sid
    thanks

    El 30/5/25 a las 23:10, Drew Parsons escribió:
    Source: pymatgen
    Followup-For: Bug #1106436

    Ah true, in this case the test failure is more specific.

    uncertainties/3.2.3-2 was uploaded in the middle of the package freeze,
    and seems to be triggering failure in pymatgen's TestInterfaceReaction.test_get_entry_energy

    Should uncertainties/3.2.3-2 be reverted back to its previous version?

    Now I remember... I talked with Colin about this a few days ago (because of
    two other packages also broken by the new "uncertainties") and we both believed that doing nothing was the best course of action:

    https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1106426;msg=21

    (I agree that I could have made that more visible, sorry for that).

    In this case "do nothing" = let all the involved packages in testing
    to be the ones which we release with Debian 13.

    I'm going to mark this as "not happening in trixie" to be consistent with
    the above. If required we can ask for a trixie-ignore tag.

    Thanks.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Santiago Vila@21:1/5 to All on Fri May 30 23:50:01 2025
    El 30/5/25 a las 23:23, Santiago Vila escribió:
    I'm going to mark this as "not happening in trixie" to be consistent with
    the above. [...]

    Note: I actually did that three days ago by dropping the trixie tag,
    I just did not remember that it was precisely this bug... Sorry for my confusion.
    ( It's all in the bug history in one way or another )

    Thanks.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)