Hi, Sorry - I am not proposing a patch (may have write a bad bug header). My point is that test is failing on ppc64el as it was failing sometime ago on other platform apparently. As such I was expecting you had an idea why on ppc64el the fixes are not accurate (or not sufficient). - Going to investigate on what was done on ubuntu side as it was mentionned to be fixed there. Thanks
On 07/02/2019 13:44, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > Control: severity -1 important > Control: tag -1 moreinfo > > We currently have no ppc64el binaries for cuneiform, so this is not a > regressions and therefore not RC. > > On Wed, 6 Feb 2019 14:50:47 +0100 "Thierry fa...@linux.ibm.com" > <thie...@linux.ibm.com> wrote: >> --- images/phototest.tif.txt 2011-04-19 12:49:57.000000000 +0000 >> +++ /tmp/cuneiform.test.KgXcP8dD/phototest.tif.out 2018-01-14 >> 03:21:46.536688277 +0000 >> @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ >> -This is a lot of 12 point text to test the >> -ocr code and see if it works on all types >> +This is a lot of 12 poiet text to test the >> +ocr code aed see if it works oe all types >> of file format. > Wouldn't that patch break the test for all platforms where it currently > passes? > > Andreas > -- Thierry Fauck @ fr.ibm.com
