apparently relates back to
"Failing cygdb tests on master and 0.19.x"
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/cython-users/SRKdbfftjMM
and https://github.com/cython/cython/pull/264
blind attempt to run with python-dbg build doesn't provide a relief (gdb is
7.7.1-2)
# PYTHONPATH=$PWD/build/lib.li
On Mon, 21 Jul 2014, Julian Taylor wrote:
> I haven't tried it but its possibly related to the C locale the debian
> builders use. Try with LC_ALL=C
that is the one set
> @Yaroslav if this the the case, the workaround would be building with
> LC_ALL=C.UTF-8
good hint, although would not serve
I haven't tried it but its possibly related to the C locale the debian
builders use. Try with LC_ALL=C
@Yaroslav if this the the case, the workaround would be building with
LC_ALL=C.UTF-8
On 21.07.2014 19:46, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> I wasn't able to reproduce this myself, which is why I haven't
I wasn't able to reproduce this myself, which is why I haven't done
anything about it yet...
On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 9:39 PM, Yaroslav Halchenko
wrote:
> that was quite an underwhelming response, now it is "official"
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=755340
> and I haven't ha
that was quite an underwhelming response, now it is "official"
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=755340
and I haven't had yet a chance to recheck master... anyone has a clue
before I start digging?
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> and the same issue in current(ish
and the same issue in current(ish) master:
==
ERROR: test_all (Cython.Debugger.Tests.TestLibCython.TestAll)
--
Traceback (most recent call last):
File
"/tmp/bu
FWIW -- 0.20.2 was just uploaded to Debian sid, thus should be available
to Debian folks soon too
while trying 0.20.1 across debian/ubuntus I ran into this failure
==
ERROR: test_all (Cython.Debugger.Tests.TestLibCython.TestAll)
I just pushed another bugfix release for the 0.20.x line, available on
github, cython.org, or and pypi.
== Features added ==
* Some optimisations for set/frozenset instantiation.
* Support for C++ unordered_set and unordered_map.
== Bugs fixed ==
* Access to attributes of optimised builtin meth
Tarball up at http://cython.org/release/Cython-0.20.1rc1.tar.gz
This is a bugfix only release, primarily to address the sequence
literal multiplication bug, but the set of improvements since the last
release looked relatively safe so I've pulled in everything from
master (if that turns out to be a
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Robert Bradshaw, 15.09.2011 22:31:
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>>
>>> Yaroslav Halchenko, 15.09.2011 17:08:
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>>
>> I guess we're set for a release t
Robert Bradshaw, 15.09.2011 22:31:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Yaroslav Halchenko, 15.09.2011 17:08:
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
I guess we're set for a release then, right?
+1. Should we send a release candidate around, or just cut it (as it
is b
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Yaroslav Halchenko, 15.09.2011 17:08:
>>
>> On Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
I guess we're set for a release then, right?
>>
>>> +1. Should we send a release candidate around, or just cut it (as it
>>> is bugfix-only and
Yaroslav Halchenko, 15.09.2011 17:08:
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
I guess we're set for a release then, right?
+1. Should we send a release candidate around, or just cut it (as it
is bugfix-only and hasn't been too long since the last one)?
Also, is there a parameterized je
just to make sure -- 0.15.1 would come out from 'release' branch, right?
(there is motion to get fresh cython into debian and I am arguing that
it would be better to take post 0.15 snapshot)
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> > I guess we're set for a release then, right?
> +1. Should
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 10:01 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Robert Bradshaw, 13.09.2011 05:49:
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 12:23 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
>>>
>>> 2011/9/11 Stefan Behnel:
Stefan Behnel, 11.09.2011 15:08:
>
> I see two ways to get a release out: create a branch from
Robert Bradshaw, 13.09.2011 05:49:
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 12:23 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
2011/9/11 Stefan Behnel:
Stefan Behnel, 11.09.2011 15:08:
I see two ways to get a release out: create a branch from the current
master and remove from it what we don't consider stable (or 'right' for
tha
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 12:23 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
> 2011/9/11 Stefan Behnel :
>> Stefan Behnel, 11.09.2011 15:08:
>>>
>>> I see two ways to get a release out: create a branch from the current
>>> master and remove from it what we don't consider stable (or 'right' for
>>> that release), or mer
2011/9/11 Stefan Behnel :
> Stefan Behnel, 11.09.2011 15:08:
>>
>> I see two ways to get a release out: create a branch from the current
>> master and remove from it what we don't consider stable (or 'right' for
>> that release), or merge the most important and easily mergeable changes
>> over to t
mark florisson, 11.09.2011 16:35:
On 11 September 2011 11:33, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Robert Bradshaw, 11.09.2011 07:54:
+1 to another release soon. Is there anything in the devel branch
that's not ready to go out?
Yes, the current state of my decorator changes breaks code in Sage. I
wouldn't kn
On 11 September 2011 11:33, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Robert Bradshaw, 11.09.2011 07:54:
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 10:32 PM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
>>>
>>> Are we going to make a bugfix release?
>>>
>>> There are some critical bugs in 0.15, T725 for example.
>
> Yes, and some others.
>
>
>>> Think
Vitja Makarov, 11.09.2011 16:13:
2011/9/11 Stefan Behnel:
A problem with the current master branch is that we already dropped support
for Py2.3 in it...
I see two ways to get a release out: create a branch from the current master
and remove from it what we don't consider stable (or 'right' for
2011/9/11 Stefan Behnel :
> Stefan Behnel, 11.09.2011 13:33:
>>
>> Robert Bradshaw, 11.09.2011 07:54:
>>>
>>> On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 10:32 PM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
Are we going to make a bugfix release?
There are some critical bugs in 0.15, T725 for example.
>>
>> Yes, and some othe
Stefan Behnel, 11.09.2011 15:08:
I see two ways to get a release out: create a branch from the current
master and remove from it what we don't consider stable (or 'right' for
that release), or merge the most important and easily mergeable changes
over to the current release branch for 0.15.1 and
Stefan Behnel, 11.09.2011 13:33:
Robert Bradshaw, 11.09.2011 07:54:
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 10:32 PM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
Are we going to make a bugfix release?
There are some critical bugs in 0.15, T725 for example.
Yes, and some others.
Think we should port fixes back to 0.15 and then re
Stefan Behnel, 11.09.2011 13:33:
Robert Bradshaw, 11.09.2011 07:54:
Is there anything in the devel branch that's not ready to go out?
Yes, the current state of my decorator changes breaks code in Sage. I
wouldn't know of anything else, so maybe it's enough to back those changes
out from a bran
Robert Bradshaw, 11.09.2011 07:54:
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 10:32 PM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
Are we going to make a bugfix release?
There are some critical bugs in 0.15, T725 for example.
Yes, and some others.
Think we should port fixes back to 0.15 and then release it as 0.15.1
+1
+1 to
On 11 September 2011 07:54, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> +1 to another release soon. Is there anything in the devel branch
> that's not ready to go out? (I was also thinking of doing a release as
> soon as fused functions and memory views got in.)
>
> On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 10:32 PM, Vitja Makarov
+1 to another release soon. Is there anything in the devel branch
that's not ready to go out? (I was also thinking of doing a release as
soon as fused functions and memory views got in.)
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 10:32 PM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
> Are we going to make a bugfix release?
>
> There are
Are we going to make a bugfix release?
There are some critical bugs in 0.15, T725 for example.
Think we should port fixes back to 0.15 and then release it as 0.15.1
--
vitja.
___
cython-devel mailing list
cython-devel@python.org
http://mail.python.org/
29 matches
Mail list logo
