-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 35
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Pkg.test("Circuitscape"): Single test failure - Raster Pairwise #178
Comments
Tests need to pass cleanly. So this is worrisome and needs to be investigated. |
Ok. Also, apologies for pasting same output twice. This is the summary of test results: Test Summary: | Pass Error Total
Single Precision Tests | 576 1 577
Network Pairwise | 93 93
Network Advanced | 12 12
Raster Pairwise | 320 1 321
Raster Advanced | 5 5
Raster One to All | 134 134
Raster ALl to One | 12 12
ERROR: LoadError: Some tests did not pass: 576 passed, 0 failed, 1 errored, 0 broken.
in expression starting at C:\Users\User\.julia\packages\Circuitscape\1UJ9H\test\runtests.jl:11
ERROR: Package Circuitscape errored during testing
Stacktrace:
[1] pkgerror(::String, ::Vararg{String,N} where N) at C:\cygwin\home\Administrator\buildbot\worker\package_win64\build\usr\share\julia\stdlib\v1.1\Pkg\src\Types.jl:120
[2] #test#66(::Bool, ::Function, ::Pkg.Types.Context, ::Array{Pkg.Types.PackageSpec,1}) at C:\cygwin\home\Administrator\buildbot\worker\package_win64\build\usr\share\julia\stdlib\v1.1\Pkg\src\Operations.jl:1328
[3] #test at C:\cygwin\home\Administrator\buildbot\worker\package_win64\build\usr\share\julia\stdlib\v1.1\Pkg\src\API.jl:0 [inlined]
[4] #test#44(::Bool, ::Base.Iterators.Pairs{Union{},Union{},Tuple{},NamedTuple{(),Tuple{}}}, ::Function, ::Pkg.Types.Context, ::Array{Pkg.Types.PackageSpec,1}) at C:\cygwin\home\Administrator\buildbot\worker\package_win64\build\usr\share\julia\stdlib\v1.1\Pkg\src\API.jl:193
[5] test at C:\cygwin\home\Administrator\buildbot\worker\package_win64\build\usr\share\julia\stdlib\v1.1\Pkg\src\API.jl:178 [inlined]
[6] #test#43 at C:\cygwin\home\Administrator\buildbot\worker\package_win64\build\usr\share\julia\stdlib\v1.1\Pkg\src\API.jl:175 [inlined]
[7] test at C:\cygwin\home\Administrator\buildbot\worker\package_win64\build\usr\share\julia\stdlib\v1.1\Pkg\src\API.jl:175 [inlined]
[8] #test#42 at C:\cygwin\home\Administrator\buildbot\worker\package_win64\build\usr\share\julia\stdlib\v1.1\Pkg\src\API.jl:174 [inlined]
[9] test at C:\cygwin\home\Administrator\buildbot\worker\package_win64\build\usr\share\julia\stdlib\v1.1\Pkg\src\API.jl:174 [inlined]
[10] #test#41(::Base.Iterators.Pairs{Union{},Union{},Tuple{},NamedTuple{(),Tuple{}}}, ::Function, ::String) at C:\cygwin\home\Administrator\buildbot\worker\package_win64\build\usr\share\julia\stdlib\v1.1\Pkg\src\API.jl:173
[11] test(::String) at C:\cygwin\home\Administrator\buildbot\worker\package_win64\build\usr\share\julia\stdlib\v1.1\Pkg\src\API.jl:173
[12] top-level scope at none:0 Any ideas on first steps for investigating? I'm unfamiliar with Julia language and am unsure how to diagnose testing errors. |
I am facing the same issue, additionally, the same error is spit back when using 1.0.3 happening after Cholmod changing the precision to double. Could the tests being run be throwing an error after converting to double? |
@anwilk could you paste that error here please? I just throw a warning saying that there's a conversion to double going on. I have a suspicion the timing of that warning is coincidental. |
I think you're right about it being coincidental, it appears that other tests are completed and pass using double precision: Here is the inline warning and error... Info: Testing sgVerify17 and Stacktrace: Stacktrace: Overall it seems to be the same error @Chulkey was experiencing |
I am also getting this error @ranjanan, when running the latest version of Circuitscape:
|
Hello @ranjanan any news on a fix for this? I understand that this is open source software and comes with no guarantees in terms of reliability and operability...I really appreciate the work you're doing on this project and I honestly don't mean to pester you! Having said that, I do have some upcoming projects that I'd love to use Circuitscape for. Looking forward to hearing from you. |
I am guessing @ranjanan was busy with the semester winding down. @ranjanan Might these be windows related only? @simon-tarr Can you try on a different windows computer? Is the one you are using 32-bit or 64-bit windows? |
Hi @ViralBShah. I believe @ranjanan has been a little busy yes. To answer your question I have tried it on two 64-Bit Windows machines, both with the same result. I do have access to a Linux machine so I think my next port of call will be to run the tests on there and see if I get the same result. |
I've no idea on how to debug this! I've asked for help here: https://discourse.julialang.org/t/mmap-error-on-windows/24594 |
I'm having this issue on a Windows 10 Machine (64 bit), but not on MacOS so thinking it's Windows issue. |
@mattwilliamson13 it is a windows specific issue. |
Did the update to Omniscape also resolve this issue? Or is it still not possible to pass tests on a Windows machine? |
No it didn't. The way to resolve this is to get rid of the SharedArray dependency, but we are planning to do this as we move Circuitscape to Julia's new multi-threading infrastructure (#197, https://julialang.org/blog/2019/07/multithreading), which we will prioritize from now on. |
@Chulkey Do you still get the failure on Julia 1.2? Can you say more about your machine? Which exact version of windows? Is it 32-bit windows or 64-bit? Is Julia 32-bit or 64-bit. In Julia, please paste the output of |
I am having the same problem on Windows 10
|
#223 should close this issue. Please file new issues if problem perisists on the latest master. |
Actually more likely a dup of #188 |
Installing Julia v1.1 on Win10 machine for use with Curcuitscape/ResistanceGA in R.
Wondering if this test failure is something I should be concerned about and if so, any advice on a remedy?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: