|
From: | Ben Woodcroft |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add dlib. |
Date: | Wed, 17 Aug 2016 15:01:24 +1000 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 |
On 17/08/16 13:24, Ben Woodcroft wrote:
I wasn't clear here. This was with lapack uncommented out. Subsequently I tested with both these flags #f and lapack commented out, then it was deterministic with --rounds=2. Let me know if you want any further testing done.On 17/08/16 09:45, Leo Famulari wrote:On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 09:31:11AM +1000, Ben Woodcroft wrote:On 17/08/16 06:47, Leo Famulari wrote:Me too, although it appeared non-deterministic. I'm afraid I haven't time toOn Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 11:45:16AM +0100, Marius Bakke wrote:I initially made this package on a foreign distro without "lapack" in inputs and have verified that dropping LAPACK makes the tests pass.I also found some other optional dependencies after digging around thesource, as well as a recommendation to disable/enable asserts: http://dlib.net/dlib/config.h.htmlBen, Leo: Can you try the following patch and see if that works for you?Yes, this patch builds for me.see if this patch is suitable to push just now. Leo?How did it appear non-deterministic to you?Just based on guix build --check:guix build: error: build failed: derivation `/gnu/store/sxybcxw64q1ajzq6dysal75ffgq6238i-dlib-19.1.drv' may not be deterministic: output `/gnu/store/il57dcii4pzii11zlixjjxxxw699bg5x-dlib-19.1' differsI'm actually not sure, why does it say "may not be deterministic"? If it builds twice and the second version is different, doesn't that mean it is definitely not deterministic by counter-example, unless there has been some leakage into the build container?I also tried building it with #parallel-build? #f and #parallel-tests? #f. It worked in the first round but failed the second.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |