From: Orion P. <or...@co...> - 2012-01-16 21:46:49
Attachments:
plplot-octave.patch
|
Two issues arose trying to build plplot with octave 3.6.0: - octave needs to be passed "--no-window-system" if DISPLAY is not set, which I need to due when building the fedora package. The attached patch allows me to set the $otaveopts variable to do this. - split has now be removed from octave in favor of strsplit: 6: error: `split' undefined near line 3 column 5 I believe this has been raised before but was decided to stay with split at the time for octave 3.0 support. Octave 3.0 is still in EPEL 5, though no idea who is using that, and in our case we won't be building a newer plplot in EPEL 5 anyway. -- Orion Poplawski Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222 NWRA, Boulder Office FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane or...@co... Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.cora.nwra.com |
From: Alan W. I. <ir...@be...> - 2012-01-17 01:25:17
|
On 2012-01-16 14:46-0700 Orion Poplawski wrote: > - split has now be removed from octave in favor of strsplit: > > 6: error: `split' undefined near line 3 column 5 > > I believe this has been raised before but was decided to stay with split at > the time for octave 3.0 support. Thanks for bringing this up, Orion. The rest of this is primarily to Andrew. Hi Andrew: Out of curiosity I looked up that discussion, and the 2010-07-26 conclusion by you was "strsplit was only introduced in octave3.2 so I do not (yet) want to switch to it. Octave 3.0 is still widely used. Everything else in plplot just requires 3.0." Of course, now is almost a year and a half later, and I therefore think now would be a good time (especially since split is causing obvious problems for the most recent octave release) for you to replace split with strsplit and mention in the release notes that the minimum version of octave we now support is 3.2. >From what Orion says, EPEL (Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux) users apparently only have access to Octave 3.0, and I assume that most enterprise distros also have similar Octave version constraints. But I don't think we have to be too concerned about such cases since older PLplot versions should satisfy most "enterprise" needs. Furthermore, with regard to "modern" (i.e., non-enterprise) distros, probably Debian stable is the oldest of those, and it installs Octave 3.2.4-8 where split was already deprecated in favour of strsplit. Alan __________________________ Alan W. Irwin Astronomical research affiliation with Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria (astrowww.phys.uvic.ca). Programming affiliations with the FreeEOS equation-of-state implementation for stellar interiors (freeeos.sf.net); the Time Ephemerides project (timeephem.sf.net); PLplot scientific plotting software package (plplot.sf.net); the libLASi project (unifont.org/lasi); the Loads of Linux Links project (loll.sf.net); and the Linux Brochure Project (lbproject.sf.net). __________________________ Linux-powered Science __________________________ |
From: Orion P. <or...@co...> - 2012-01-27 19:35:43
|
On 01/16/2012 06:25 PM, Alan W. Irwin wrote: > On 2012-01-16 14:46-0700 Orion Poplawski wrote: > >> - split has now be removed from octave in favor of strsplit: >> >> 6: error: `split' undefined near line 3 column 5 >> >> I believe this has been raised before but was decided to stay with split at >> the time for octave 3.0 support. > > Thanks for bringing this up, Orion. The rest of this is primarily > to Andrew. > > Hi Andrew: > > Out of curiosity I looked up that discussion, and the 2010-07-26 > conclusion by you was > > "strsplit was only introduced in octave3.2 so I do not (yet) want to > switch to it. Octave 3.0 is still widely used. Everything else in > plplot just requires 3.0." > > Of course, now is almost a year and a half later, and I therefore > think now would be a good time (especially since split is causing > obvious problems for the most recent octave release) for you to > replace split with strsplit and mention in the release notes that the > minimum version of octave we now support is 3.2. > >> From what Orion says, EPEL (Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux) users > apparently only have access to Octave 3.0, and I assume that most > enterprise distros also have similar Octave version constraints. But I > don't think we have to be too concerned about such cases since older > PLplot versions should satisfy most "enterprise" needs. Furthermore, > with regard to "modern" (i.e., non-enterprise) distros, probably > Debian stable is the oldest of those, and it installs Octave 3.2.4-8 > where split was already deprecated in favour of strsplit. Could this get addressed soon? plplot currently cannot be rebuilt for octave 3.6.0 in Fedora rawhide. Thanks! -- Orion Poplawski Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222 NWRA, Boulder Office FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane or...@co... Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.cora.nwra.com |
From: Chris M. <dev...@gm...> - 2012-01-27 19:59:57
|
Is there some reason that split cannot be used for Octave releases and strsplit for more recent ones rather than abandoning support for older Octaves? --Chris On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Orion Poplawski <or...@co...> wrote: > On 01/16/2012 06:25 PM, Alan W. Irwin wrote: >> On 2012-01-16 14:46-0700 Orion Poplawski wrote: >> >>> - split has now be removed from octave in favor of strsplit: >>> >>> 6: error: `split' undefined near line 3 column 5 >>> >>> I believe this has been raised before but was decided to stay with split at >>> the time for octave 3.0 support. >> >> Thanks for bringing this up, Orion. The rest of this is primarily >> to Andrew. >> >> Hi Andrew: >> >> Out of curiosity I looked up that discussion, and the 2010-07-26 >> conclusion by you was >> >> "strsplit was only introduced in octave3.2 so I do not (yet) want to >> switch to it. Octave 3.0 is still widely used. Everything else in >> plplot just requires 3.0." >> >> Of course, now is almost a year and a half later, and I therefore >> think now would be a good time (especially since split is causing >> obvious problems for the most recent octave release) for you to >> replace split with strsplit and mention in the release notes that the >> minimum version of octave we now support is 3.2. >> >>> From what Orion says, EPEL (Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux) users >> apparently only have access to Octave 3.0, and I assume that most >> enterprise distros also have similar Octave version constraints. But I >> don't think we have to be too concerned about such cases since older >> PLplot versions should satisfy most "enterprise" needs. Furthermore, >> with regard to "modern" (i.e., non-enterprise) distros, probably >> Debian stable is the oldest of those, and it installs Octave 3.2.4-8 >> where split was already deprecated in favour of strsplit. > > Could this get addressed soon? plplot currently cannot be rebuilt for octave > 3.6.0 in Fedora rawhide. > > Thanks! > > > -- > Orion Poplawski > Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222 > NWRA, Boulder Office FAX: 303-415-9702 > 3380 Mitchell Lane or...@co... > Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.cora.nwra.com > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Try before you buy = See our experts in action! > The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers > is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, > Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 > _______________________________________________ > Plplot-devel mailing list > Plp...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plplot-devel |
From: Alan W. I. <ir...@be...> - 2012-01-27 23:56:58
|
On 2012-01-27 14:59-0500 Chris Marshall wrote: > Is there some reason that split cannot be used > for Octave releases and strsplit for more recent > ones rather than abandoning support for older > Octaves? Hi Chris: I think split is the way we should go since it doesn't compromise our current Octave 3.2.4 support and removes a roadblock for later Octave versions where the long-deprecated strsplit is no longer available. Also, 3.2.4 is already pretty old; 3.4.3 (!) is the recommended stable version of octave according to http://www.gnu.org/software/octave/download.html, and Orion is already using 3.6.0! Thus, our support is already pretty far behind the recommended version and way behind Orion's cutting-edge version. The problem is you are asking us to stand pat so that _we might_ (since we have no comprehensive testing for older Octave platforms) be able to support versions of Octave older than 3.2.4, rather than making a simple change that is compatible with 3.2.4 and which should allow us to support the Octave recommended version and from what Orion reports maybe even the cutting edge version as well. In sum, my attitude is I am happy that we have been able to support Octave 3.2.4 pretty well considering our limited Octave resources, and I don't really trust versions of Octave earlier than 3.2.4 since we are unable to do comprehensive tests of such platforms any longer. (For example, my Debian Squeeze platform provides octave 3.2.4 but no version earlier than that.) In addition, if a small change like moving from strsplit to split also allows us to support everything up to Orion's cutting-edge Octave-3.6.0 that would be a tremendous bonus. After all, Orion has a long track record of testing PLplot for cutting-edge Fedora platforms for us, and we should continue to encourage that cutting-edge testing whenever possible. Alan __________________________ Alan W. Irwin Astronomical research affiliation with Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria (astrowww.phys.uvic.ca). Programming affiliations with the FreeEOS equation-of-state implementation for stellar interiors (freeeos.sf.net); the Time Ephemerides project (timeephem.sf.net); PLplot scientific plotting software package (plplot.sf.net); the libLASi project (unifont.org/lasi); the Loads of Linux Links project (loll.sf.net); and the Linux Brochure Project (lbproject.sf.net). __________________________ Linux-powered Science __________________________ |
From: Andrew R. <and...@us...> - 2012-01-28 08:04:50
|
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 03:56:50PM -0800, Alan Irwin wrote: > On 2012-01-27 14:59-0500 Chris Marshall wrote: > >> Is there some reason that split cannot be used >> for Octave releases and strsplit for more recent >> ones rather than abandoning support for older >> Octaves? > > Hi Chris: > > I think split is the way we should go since it doesn't compromise our > current Octave 3.2.4 support and removes a roadblock for later Octave > versions where the long-deprecated strsplit is no longer available. > Also, 3.2.4 is already pretty old; 3.4.3 (!) is the recommended stable > version of octave according to > http://www.gnu.org/software/octave/download.html, and Orion is already > using 3.6.0! Thus, our support is already pretty far behind the > recommended version and way behind Orion's cutting-edge version. The > problem is you are asking us to stand pat so that _we might_ (since > we have no comprehensive testing for older Octave platforms) be able > to support versions of Octave older than 3.2.4, rather than making a > simple change that is compatible with 3.2.4 and which should allow us > to support the Octave recommended version and from what Orion reports > maybe even the cutting edge version as well. > > In sum, my attitude is I am happy that we have been able to support > Octave 3.2.4 pretty well considering our limited Octave resources, and > I don't really trust versions of Octave earlier than 3.2.4 since we > are unable to do comprehensive tests of such platforms any longer. > (For example, my Debian Squeeze platform provides octave 3.2.4 but no > version earlier than that.) In addition, if a small change like moving > from strsplit to split also allows us to support everything up to > Orion's cutting-edge Octave-3.6.0 that would be a tremendous bonus. > After all, Orion has a long track record of testing PLplot for > cutting-edge Fedora platforms for us, and we should continue to > encourage that cutting-edge testing whenever possible. Orion - the changes were committed to svn last week. Have you tried since then? If so and it still fails, can you provide details? Chris / Alan - supporting multiple versions in the same script is not an option since octave parses the file to interpret it before running. Even if an undefined command is within an if ... end block which won't be used it will still cause the script to fail. One could make these files configurable, but this is a lot of work to support version octave 3.0 and earlier which are rather old now. Do you have a good reason for requiring this support? Alan - I think you mean strsplit not split. We used split up until last week because that worked on newer versions as well as old versions, however according to Orion split has now been removed (it has been marked obsolete for some time causing warnings in the octave scripts). Getting rid of the warnings is another advantage of making 3.2 the minimum supported version. Andrew |
From: Orion P. <or...@co...> - 2012-01-28 15:02:28
|
On 01/28/2012 01:04 AM, Andrew Ross wrote: > Orion - the changes were committed to svn last week. Have you tried since then? > If so and it still fails, can you provide details? Sorry, forgot to check. But split is still used in test_octave.sh.in and test_octave_interactive.sh.in. -- Orion Poplawski Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222 NWRA/CoRA Division FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane or...@co... Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.cora.nwra.com |
From: Alan W. I. <ir...@be...> - 2012-01-28 19:31:15
|
On 2012-01-28 08:02-0700 Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 01/28/2012 01:04 AM, Andrew Ross wrote: >> Orion - the changes were committed to svn last week. Have you tried since then? >> If so and it still fails, can you provide details? > > Sorry, forgot to check. But split is still used in test_octave.sh.in > and test_octave_interactive.sh.in I confirm that for revision 12160 and also (presumably as a result of split still being in the above two files) you get the following warning message from the test_octave_psc target for that revision: warning: split is obsolete and will be removed from a future version of Octave; please use strsplit instead. Andrew, I just plain missed your commit message on plplot-cvs, and it was because I was still seing the above warning message that I thought you had not yet responded to Orion's request. Anyhow, I am completely in support of the split ==> strsplit conversions you have done already and also completing that conversion for test_octave.sh.in and test_octave_interactive.sh.in. Sorry I completely botched the meaning of my answer to Chris on this subject by swapping the meaning of split and strsplit in that post. Alan __________________________ Alan W. Irwin Astronomical research affiliation with Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria (astrowww.phys.uvic.ca). Programming affiliations with the FreeEOS equation-of-state implementation for stellar interiors (freeeos.sf.net); the Time Ephemerides project (timeephem.sf.net); PLplot scientific plotting software package (plplot.sf.net); the libLASi project (unifont.org/lasi); the Loads of Linux Links project (loll.sf.net); and the Linux Brochure Project (lbproject.sf.net). __________________________ Linux-powered Science __________________________ |
From: Andrew R. <and...@us...> - 2012-01-28 19:28:10
|
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 08:02:17AM -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 01/28/2012 01:04 AM, Andrew Ross wrote: > > Orion - the changes were committed to svn last week. Have you tried since then? > > If so and it still fails, can you provide details? > > Sorry, forgot to check. But split is still used in test_octave.sh.in > and test_octave_interactive.sh.in. Orion, No problem. Thanks for spotting the test scripts. I'd overlooked that one. Now fixed as well. Andrew |
From: Orion P. <or...@co...> - 2012-02-08 04:28:45
|
On 01/28/2012 12:27 PM, Andrew Ross wrote: > On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 08:02:17AM -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: >> On 01/28/2012 01:04 AM, Andrew Ross wrote: >>> Orion - the changes were committed to svn last week. Have you tried since then? >>> If so and it still fails, can you provide details? >> >> Sorry, forgot to check. But split is still used in test_octave.sh.in >> and test_octave_interactive.sh.in. > > Orion, > > No problem. Thanks for spotting the test scripts. I'd overlooked that > one. Now fixed as well. > > Andrew Finally was able to build (due to other Fedora issues). All looks good now. Thanks. -- Orion Poplawski Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222 NWRA/CoRA Division FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane or...@co... Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.cora.nwra.com |
From: Andrew R. <and...@us...> - 2012-02-08 07:44:24
|
On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 09:28:27PM -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 01/28/2012 12:27 PM, Andrew Ross wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 08:02:17AM -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: > >> On 01/28/2012 01:04 AM, Andrew Ross wrote: > >>> Orion - the changes were committed to svn last week. Have you tried since then? > >>> If so and it still fails, can you provide details? > >> > >> Sorry, forgot to check. But split is still used in test_octave.sh.in > >> and test_octave_interactive.sh.in. > > > > Orion, > > > > No problem. Thanks for spotting the test scripts. I'd overlooked that > > one. Now fixed as well. > > > > Andrew > > Finally was able to build (due to other Fedora issues). All looks good > now. Thanks. Glad to hear it. Andrew |
From: Alan W. I. <ir...@be...> - 2012-02-08 18:25:44
|
On 2012-02-08 07:44-0000 Andrew Ross wrote: > On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 09:28:27PM -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: >> On 01/28/2012 12:27 PM, Andrew Ross wrote: >>> On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 08:02:17AM -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: >>>> On 01/28/2012 01:04 AM, Andrew Ross wrote: >>>>> Orion - the changes were committed to svn last week. Have you tried since then? >>>>> If so and it still fails, can you provide details? >>>> >>>> Sorry, forgot to check. But split is still used in test_octave.sh.in >>>> and test_octave_interactive.sh.in. >>> >>> Orion, >>> >>> No problem. Thanks for spotting the test scripts. I'd overlooked that >>> one. Now fixed as well. >>> >>> Andrew >> >> Finally was able to build (due to other Fedora issues). All looks good >> now. Thanks. > > Glad to hear it. Orion, it is good that you can now build octave, but what is the run-time story? To discover that you have to run the test targets for octave. You can find those from make help |grep test_octave which on my system produces ... test_octave_psc ... test_octave_qtwidget ... test_octave_tk ... test_octave_wxwidgets ... test_octave_xcairo ... test_octave_xwin Considering all the trouble we had with API changes in octave in the old days from one version to the next, I would be surprised but quite pleased if all those (especially the interactive ones after test_octave_psc) worked for you. For my Octave 3.2.4 version from Debian squeeze (which is the oldest version of Octave we currently support) I have just now tried all these test targets. test_octave_wxwidgets (the wxGC version of the wxwidgets device driver) generated a segfault. Apparently from the comments in the scripts, that always happens whenever multiple plots are tried. So that adds a non-octave issue hat needs to be fixed for the wxwidgets device driver. But the rest of the devices are well maintained, and for them I got no segfaults or any other obvious run-time errors and mostly consistent interactive results. Do you get similar good interactive results (except for test_octave_wxwidgets) for 3.6.0? Same question for you, Andrew, for whatever version of Octave you are testing at the moment. If all three of us can produce good interactive results for octave, then it is probably time to consider making the above interactive tests (except for test_octave_wxwidgets) a dependency of the test_interactive target. (I didn't do that before because in the old days a lot of those interactive tests failed.) Since all the p?? examples appear to be working now for the interactive case, it may also be time to expand the list of examples that are tried for test_octave_psc. Currently that is i=[1:6 8 9 13 15 21]. Of course, since test_octave_psc is already a dependency of the test_noninteractive target, adding such examples should be done with some caution. Alan __________________________ Alan W. Irwin Astronomical research affiliation with Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria (astrowww.phys.uvic.ca). Programming affiliations with the FreeEOS equation-of-state implementation for stellar interiors (freeeos.sf.net); the Time Ephemerides project (timeephem.sf.net); PLplot scientific plotting software package (plplot.sf.net); the libLASi project (unifont.org/lasi); the Loads of Linux Links project (loll.sf.net); and the Linux Brochure Project (lbproject.sf.net). __________________________ Linux-powered Science __________________________ |
From: Orion P. <or...@co...> - 2012-02-18 04:43:18
|
On 02/08/2012 11:25 AM, Alan W. Irwin wrote: > On 2012-02-08 07:44-0000 Andrew Ross wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 09:28:27PM -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: >>> On 01/28/2012 12:27 PM, Andrew Ross wrote: >>>> On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 08:02:17AM -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: >>>>> On 01/28/2012 01:04 AM, Andrew Ross wrote: >>>>>> Orion - the changes were committed to svn last week. Have you >>>>>> tried since then? >>>>>> If so and it still fails, can you provide details? >>>>> >>>>> Sorry, forgot to check. But split is still used in test_octave.sh.in >>>>> and test_octave_interactive.sh.in. >>>> >>>> Orion, >>>> >>>> No problem. Thanks for spotting the test scripts. I'd overlooked that >>>> one. Now fixed as well. >>>> >>>> Andrew >>> >>> Finally was able to build (due to other Fedora issues). All looks good >>> now. Thanks. >> >> Glad to hear it. > > Orion, it is good that you can now build octave, but what is the > run-time story? > > To discover that you have to run the test targets for octave. You can > find those from > > make help |grep test_octave > > which on my system produces > > ... test_octave_psc > ... test_octave_qtwidget > ... test_octave_tk > ... test_octave_wxwidgets > ... test_octave_xcairo > ... test_octave_xwin > > Considering all the trouble we had with API changes in octave in the > old days from one version to the next, I would be surprised but quite > pleased if all those (especially the interactive ones after > test_octave_psc) worked for you. > > For my Octave 3.2.4 version from Debian squeeze (which is the oldest > version of Octave we currently support) I have just now tried all > these test targets. test_octave_wxwidgets (the wxGC version of the > wxwidgets device driver) generated a segfault. Apparently from the > comments in the scripts, that always happens whenever multiple plots > are tried. So that adds a non-octave issue hat needs to be fixed for > the wxwidgets device driver. But the rest of the devices are well > maintained, and for them I got no segfaults or any other obvious > run-time errors and mostly consistent interactive results. > > Do you get similar good interactive results (except for > test_octave_wxwidgets) for 3.6.0? > > Same question for you, Andrew, for whatever version of Octave you are > testing at the moment. > > If all three of us can produce good interactive results for octave, > then it is probably time to consider making the above interactive > tests (except for test_octave_wxwidgets) a dependency of the > test_interactive target. (I didn't do that before because > in the old days a lot of those interactive tests failed.) > > Since all the p?? examples appear to be working now for the > interactive case, it may also be time to expand the list of examples > that are tried for test_octave_psc. Currently that is i=[1:6 8 9 13 15 > 21]. Of course, since test_octave_psc is already a dependency of the > test_noninteractive target, adding such examples should be done with > some caution. > > Alan Not sure I follow everything here, but here's what I've done. Every build runs: ctest -V -E 'compare|qt' and that completed fine. In the installed packages I see plplot-test.sh claims to have an --interactive_octave option, but: [root@vmf17 examples]# ./plplot-test.sh --interactive_octave Never heard of an interactive device called psc. Either this is not a legitimate interactive device for PLplot or else plplot-test.sh.cmake needs some maintenance to include this interactive device in the list of possible PLplot interactive devices. - Orion -- Orion Poplawski Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222 NWRA/CoRA Division FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane or...@co... Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.cora.nwra.com |
From: Alan W. I. <ir...@be...> - 2012-02-18 20:18:44
|
On 2012-02-17 21:42-0700 Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 02/08/2012 11:25 AM, Alan W. Irwin wrote: >> On 2012-02-08 07:44-0000 Andrew Ross wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 09:28:27PM -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: >>>> On 01/28/2012 12:27 PM, Andrew Ross wrote: >>>>> On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 08:02:17AM -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: >>>>>> On 01/28/2012 01:04 AM, Andrew Ross wrote: >>>>>>> Orion - the changes were committed to svn last week. Have you >>>>>>> tried since then? >>>>>>> If so and it still fails, can you provide details? >>>>>> >>>>>> Sorry, forgot to check. But split is still used in test_octave.sh.in >>>>>> and test_octave_interactive.sh.in. >>>>> >>>>> Orion, >>>>> >>>>> No problem. Thanks for spotting the test scripts. I'd overlooked that >>>>> one. Now fixed as well. >>>>> >>>>> Andrew >>>> >>>> Finally was able to build (due to other Fedora issues). All looks good >>>> now. Thanks. >>> >>> Glad to hear it. >> >> Orion, it is good that you can now build octave, but what is the >> run-time story? >> >> To discover that you have to run the test targets for octave. You can >> find those from >> >> make help |grep test_octave >> >> which on my system produces >> >> ... test_octave_psc >> ... test_octave_qtwidget >> ... test_octave_tk >> ... test_octave_wxwidgets >> ... test_octave_xcairo >> ... test_octave_xwin >> >> Considering all the trouble we had with API changes in octave in the >> old days from one version to the next, I would be surprised but quite >> pleased if all those (especially the interactive ones after >> test_octave_psc) worked for you. >> >> For my Octave 3.2.4 version from Debian squeeze (which is the oldest >> version of Octave we currently support) I have just now tried all >> these test targets. test_octave_wxwidgets (the wxGC version of the >> wxwidgets device driver) generated a segfault. Apparently from the >> comments in the scripts, that always happens whenever multiple plots >> are tried. So that adds a non-octave issue hat needs to be fixed for >> the wxwidgets device driver. But the rest of the devices are well >> maintained, and for them I got no segfaults or any other obvious >> run-time errors and mostly consistent interactive results. >> >> Do you get similar good interactive results (except for >> test_octave_wxwidgets) for 3.6.0? >> >> Same question for you, Andrew, for whatever version of Octave you are >> testing at the moment. >> >> If all three of us can produce good interactive results for octave, >> then it is probably time to consider making the above interactive >> tests (except for test_octave_wxwidgets) a dependency of the >> test_interactive target. (I didn't do that before because >> in the old days a lot of those interactive tests failed.) >> >> Since all the p?? examples appear to be working now for the >> interactive case, it may also be time to expand the list of examples >> that are tried for test_octave_psc. Currently that is i=[1:6 8 9 13 15 >> 21]. Of course, since test_octave_psc is already a dependency of the >> test_noninteractive target, adding such examples should be done with >> some caution. >> >> Alan > > Not sure I follow everything here, but here's what I've done. Every build > runs: > > ctest -V -E 'compare|qt' > > and that completed fine. -V is okay (verbose) but -E compare|qt' excludes the critical test which compares all language results with the C results for the standard examples and also all tests related to qt. Therefore, those ctest results will be much too limited in my opinion. I suggest instead you run ctest -V or better yet make test_noninteractive The latter is a bit more comprehensive than ctest (something we could fix for ctest). Also, both ctest and make have parallel options which allow the user to take advantage of multi-cpu systems. The principal advantage of the test_noninteractive target is it handles all dependencies correctly (so you don't have to run "make all" first [which executes more than the needed dependencies] like you do for ctest). Another advantage of the test_noninteractive target is it exists and has the same comprehensive testing effect for the CMake-based build system for the installed examples. The principal advantage of ctest is it can be configured to send its results automatically to a dashboard. That is a really powerful capability. The kitware folks check the git version of cmake that is intended for their next release that way on as many different platforms as they can get volunteers to test. I think we should also organize such automatic ctest-based testing for PLplot, but I have not yet been able to do that due to too many other things on my agenda these days. > > In the installed packages I see plplot-test.sh claims to have an > --interactive_octave option, but: > > [root@vmf17 examples]# ./plplot-test.sh --interactive_octave > > Never heard of an interactive device called psc. Either this > is not a legitimate interactive device for PLplot or else > plplot-test.sh.cmake needs some maintenance to include this > interactive device in the list of possible PLplot interactive devices. As the error message implies, the default psc device is not an interactive device. So you must specify an interactive device, e.g., ./plplot-test.sh --interactive_octave --device=xwin Instead, you could run the test_octave_xwin target as suggested above (i.e., execute "make test_octave_xwin"). That target and the other interactive octave targets I listed above deal properly with all dependencies and eventually runs the ./plplot-test.sh --interactive_octave command with appropriate interactive device. I hope this explanation helps you to better understand our non-interactive and interactive test systems. Alan __________________________ Alan W. Irwin Astronomical research affiliation with Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria (astrowww.phys.uvic.ca). Programming affiliations with the FreeEOS equation-of-state implementation for stellar interiors (freeeos.sf.net); the Time Ephemerides project (timeephem.sf.net); PLplot scientific plotting software package (plplot.sf.net); the libLASi project (unifont.org/lasi); the Loads of Linux Links project (loll.sf.net); and the Linux Brochure Project (lbproject.sf.net). __________________________ Linux-powered Science __________________________ |