Hi again,
I realised that you published a new version but the issue with the test
suite remains (partially):
Test test.etmCIF passed
--- tests.etm.Rout.save_ 2019-07-17 05:55:30.013900516 +0000
+++ tests.etm.Rout_ 2019-07-17 05:55:30.017900518 +0000
@@ -246,7 +246,7 @@
116 0.9990 116.0 4.764e-07 0.99767 1.0000 1 0
124 0.9990 124.0 4.764e-07 0.99767 1.0000 2 0
164 0.9990 164.0 4.764e-07 0.99767 1.0000 0 0
-183 1.0000 183.0 1.337e-19 1.00000 1.0000 1 1
+183 1.0000 183.0 1.032e-19 1.00000 1.0000 1 1
>
> ## gonna play a bit with the state names
> dd <- sir.cont
I tend to ignore this for now but it would be really helpful
if you could solve this in a future release.
Kind regards
Andreas.
On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 07:09:38AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi,
>
> it is definitely architecture dependand. I think the solution would be
> to do a comparison tollerating this micro-diffs.
>
> Kind regards
>
> Andreas.
>
> On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 11:35:02PM +0200, Arthur Allignol wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > sorry for not getting back to you earlier. Totally forgot about it...
> >
> > If I read the diff well, there is differences in the 19th decimal (e.g.,
> > 1.337e-19 vs 1.032e-19). Could these kind of rounding error be platform
> > specific? The saved results were obtained on a Mac. I could find some time
> > to fire up a VM and see but I would tend to ignore the problem.
> >
> > Should I take further actions?
> >
> > Thanks for your work! and best,
> > Arthur
> >
> >
> > > On 12. Sep 2018, at 14:15, Andreas Tille <ti...@debian.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Arthur,
> > >
> > > there was a bug report filed against the Debian packaged version of etm.
> > > It seems the saved results are not matching the result of the test.
> > >
> > > Could you please comment on this - may be we are doing something wrong?
> > >
> > > Kind regards
> > >
> > > Andreas.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 12:26:13PM +0200, Graham Inggs wrote:
> > >> Source: r-cran-etm
> > >> Version: 1.0.4-2
> > >> User: debian...@lists.debian.org
> > >> Usertags: regression
> > >>
> > >> Hi R Package Team
> > >>
> > >> Now that #903672 has been resolved, we can see that r-cran-etm fails its
> > >> autopkgtest [1] with the following errors:
> > >>
> > >> --- tests.etm.Rout.save_ 2018-09-10 10:04:21.100595425 +0000
> > >> +++ tests.etm.Rout_ 2018-09-10 10:04:21.104595447 +0000
> > >> @@ -246,7 +246,7 @@
> > >> 116 0.9990 116.0 4.764e-07 0.99767 1.0000 1 0
> > >> 124 0.9990 124.0 4.764e-07 0.99767 1.0000 2 0
> > >> 164 0.9990 164.0 4.764e-07 0.99767 1.0000 0 0
> > >> -183 1.0000 183.0 1.337e-19 1.00000 1.0000 1 1
> > >> +183 1.0000 183.0 1.032e-19 1.00000 1.0000 1 1
> > >>>
> > >>> ## gonna play a bit with the state names
> > >>> dd <- sir.cont
> > >> @@ -694,7 +694,7 @@
> > >> 0.90344 35 1.193e-04 0.88204 0.92484 54 4
> > >> 0.96816 54 4.374e-05 0.95520 0.98113 15 2
> > >> 0.98894 77 1.668e-05 0.98094 0.99695 5 0
> > >> - 1.00000 460 1.016e-20 1.00000 1.00000 1 1
> > >> + 1.00000 460 2.253e-19 1.00000 1.00000 1 1
> > >>
> > >> Transition 1 1
> > >> P time var lower upper n.risk n.event
> > >> autopkgtest [10:04:21]: test run-unit-test: -----------------------]
> > >> autopkgtest [10:04:21]: test run-unit-test: - - - - - - - - - - results
> > >> - -
> > >> - - - - - - - -
> > >> run-unit-test FAIL non-zero exit status 1
> > >>
> > >> Regards
> > >> Graham
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> [1] https://ci.debian.net/packages/r/r-cran-etm/unstable/amd64/
> > >
> > > --
> > > http://fam-tille.de
> >
> >
>
> --
> http://fam-tille.de
>
--
http://fam-tille.de
