Re: testing install of suitesparse

[Ben Abbott]

On Oct 23, 2007, at 4:29 PM, Ben Abbott wrote:

> On Tuesday, October 23, 2007, at 09:20AM, "David Bateman"  
> <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Ben Abbott wrote:
> > > I've created a local Fink package on my Mac for suitesparse and have
> > > compiled Octave, which had no problem locating it.
> > >
> > > I'd like to test the suitesparse functionality as thoroughly as
> > > possible. Does anyone have any scripts which might help?
> > >
> > > Short of that, I'll write on myself.
> > In Octave or out of it? In Octave "make check" has some pretty  
> > extensive
> > tests of the sparse functionality including all of suitesparse.  
> > Out  of
> > Octave, suitesparse includes "cov" make targets that use demo code  
> > and
> > gcov to test all of the functionality..
> >
> > D.
>
> David, I'm running 2.9.14 (waiting for the Fink update to 2.9.15).
>
> When I type "make check" from Octave, I get,
>
> ------------------------------------
> make checkparse error:
>
>   syntax error
>
> > > > make check
> ------------------------------------
>
> I expect I've misunderstood your reply, or I need 2.9.15?
>
> Ben

ok, hat-tip to Muthiah Annamalai pointed out my improper inference.

I've compiled a copy of Octave I obtained from cvs on the 7th of  
October and did the check. The only problem with sparse is below  
(from fntests.log).

I had two failures

  scripts/time/datevec.m ................................. PASS    
10/11   FAIL 1
  test_sparse.m .......................................... PASS  
1175/1176 FAIL 1

The 1st failure, from fntest.log ...

-----------------------
>>>>> processing /Users/bpabbott/src/octave/07.10.12/scripts/testfun/ 
test.m
  ***** xtest error("This test is known to fail")
!!!!! known failure
error: This test is known to fail
>>>>> processing /Users/bpabbott/src/octave/07.10.12/scripts/time/ 
calendar.m
>>>>> processing /Users/bpabbott/src/octave/07.10.12/scripts/time/ 
datenum.m
>>>>> processing /Users/bpabbott/src/octave/07.10.12/scripts/time/ 
datestr.m
>>>>> processing /Users/bpabbott/src/octave/07.10.12/scripts/time/ 
datevec.m
  ***** assert(datevec("09/13"),[nowvec(1),9,13,0,0,0]);
!!!!! test failed
error: assert (datevec ("09/13"),[nowvec(1), 9, 13, 0, 0, 0]) expected
   2007      9     13      0      0      0
but got
   2000      9     13      0      0      0
values do not match
shared variables {
  nowvec =

     2007.0000     10.0000     23.0000     22.0000      2.0000      
26.8259

}
-----------------------

This appears to be expected. The second failure from fntest.log ...

-----------------------
>>>>> processing test_sparse
  ***** assert(as./bs,sparse(af./bf,true),100*eps);
!!!!! test failed
error: assert (as ./ bs,sparse (af ./ bf, true),100 * eps) expected
   Inf + Infi     2 -   1i   NaN - NaNi   NaN - NaNi
     0 +   0i   NaN - NaNi   NaN - NaNi   Inf + Infi
     0 +   0i     0 +   0i   NaN - NaNi   Inf - NaNi
but got
   NaN - NaNi     2 -   1i   NaN - NaNi   NaN - NaNi
     0 +   0i   NaN - NaNi   NaN - NaNi   NaN - NaNi
     0 +   0i     0 +   0i   NaN - NaNi   NaN - NaNi
NaNs don't match
-----------------------

I noticed the following message after running "make test"

-----------------------
Summary:

  PASS   3731
  FAIL      2

There were 3 expected failures (see fntests.log for details).
-----------------------

So there are "3 expected failures" and I only have 2 ... I assume 1  
or more of these expected failures have been corrected?

In any event, is the failure I've encountered expected?

Ben