gsl_sf_bessel_jl_e error in CVS

gsl_sf_bessel_jl_e error in CVS

[Giulio Bottazzi]

Hi,
CVS updated this morning and make check fails with

...
make[2]: Entering directory `/usr/local/gsl/specfunc'
FAIL: gsl_sf_bessel_jl_e(30, 3878.62, &r) [172]
  expected: -0.0002328556703433088
  obtained: -0.0002328556703433191 +/- 1.861356431733683e-18 (rel=7.99361e-15)
  fracdiff: 2.223293667697852e-14
  value/expected not consistent within reported error
  -0.000232855670343319149  1.8613564317336825e-18
FAIL: Bessel Functions [395]
FAIL: test
...

Failure observed on both x86 and amd64 arch under linux.

Best,
Giulio.


-- 
Giulio Bottazzi <giulio.bottazzi@gmail.com>
http://giulio.bottazzi.googlepages.com
PGP Key ID:BAB0A33F

Re: gsl_sf_bessel_jl_e error in CVS

[Brian Gough]

At Mon, 5 Nov 2007 09:56:56 +0100,
Giulio Bottazzi wrote:
> CVS updated this morning and make check fails with
> 
> ...
> make[2]: Entering directory `/usr/local/gsl/specfunc'
> FAIL: gsl_sf_bessel_jl_e(30, 3878.62, &r) [172]
>   expected: -0.0002328556703433088
>   obtained: -0.0002328556703433191 +/- 1.861356431733683e-18 (rel=7.99361e-15)
>   fracdiff: 2.223293667697852e-14
>   value/expected not consistent within reported error
>   -0.000232855670343319149  1.8613564317336825e-18
> FAIL: Bessel Functions [395]
> FAIL: test
> ...
> 
> Failure observed on both x86 and amd64 arch under linux.

Thanks, I left this failure in as a reminder that it needs to be fixed
for the next release.  Perhaps I should resurrect the KNOWN-FAILURES
file to keep track of these.

-- 
Brian Gough

On GSL version control

[Heikki Orsila]

Hello. I just converted GSL CVS repo into Git to advertise possibilities 
of using Git for GSL development. I'm only a newbie on GSL, but I think 
any GSL developer would benefit from a system better than CVS.

If you try this, please use Git version 1.4 or later:

$ git clone git://zakalwe.fi/gsl gsl.git

(takes approx 12 seconds on 10 Mbit line to get the _whole_ version 
history of the project)

$ cd gsl.git
$ git log --stat

Next time, git pull is enough, and that synchronizes only changes from 
the repository. 

Try branching and merging for features, it's very very easy:

$ git checkout -b mytestbranch
$ edit files && commit
$ git checkout master
$ git merge mytestbranch

This is not a fork of the project, just a demo of what Git can do. I 
hope you like it :)

I used the following authorfile for cvs to git conversion:

bjg = Brian Gough <bjg@network-theory.co.uk>
booth = Michael Booth <user@address.unknown>
rossi = Fabrice Rossi <rossi@ufrmd.dauphine.fr>
jungman = Gerard Jungman <jungman@lanl.gov>
jt = James Theiler <jt@lanl.gov>
jimmyd = Jim Davies <jimmyd@nis.lanl.gov>
rosalia = Mark Galassi <rosalia@lanl.gov>
palken = Patrick Alken <patrick.alken@colorado.edu>
priedhor = Reid Priedhorsky <rp@lanl.gov>

-- 
Heikki Orsila			Barbie's law:
heikki.orsila@iki.fi		"Math is hard, let's go shopping!"
http://www.iki.fi/shd

Re: On GSL version control

[Brian Gough]

At Tue, 6 Nov 2007 13:57:53 +0200,
Heikki Orsila wrote:
> 
> Hello. I just converted GSL CVS repo into Git to advertise possibilities 
> of using Git for GSL development. I'm only a newbie on GSL, but I think 
> any GSL developer would benefit from a system better than CVS.

Thanks for your email.  I've been trying git out myself in recent
weeks, and considering whether it is viable (for moving the repository
to Savannah.gnu.org).

As you probably know, they have recently added support for git, with
simultaneous CVS read-only checkouts - which is useful for people who
don't want to switch from CVS.

I hit a few problems in the conversion process - for example, you'll
find there is a stray file sum/gsl_sf_sum.h in HEAD which should not
be there.

It is caused by cvsps putting some patches in incorrect order -- with
later versions of the file coming before earlier versions (a
workaround is to use the cvsps -z 60 option to reduce the patch time
window).

Git certainly has some advantages over CVS - the main one in my
opinion is the ability to verify the integrity of the repository from
the top-level SHA checksum.

-- 
Brian Gough

Re: On GSL version control

[Heikki Orsila]

On Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 04:52:56PM +0000, Brian Gough wrote:
> I hit a few problems in the conversion process - for example, you'll
> find there is a stray file sum/gsl_sf_sum.h in HEAD which should not
> be there.
> 
> It is caused by cvsps putting some patches in incorrect order -- with
> later versions of the file coming before earlier versions (a
> workaround is to use the cvsps -z 60 option to reduce the patch time
> window).

Ah, too bad CVS doesn't have the concept of change sets. Imo, it's a 
reason alone to switch away from CVS.

> Git certainly has some advantages over CVS - the main one in my
> opinion is the ability to verify the integrity of the repository from
> the top-level SHA checksum.

Imo, it has huge advantages over CVS:

 * change sets -> accurate checkpointing to any version

 * integrity is verified
	* no difference between binary and ascii files -> data is 
	  preserved exactly no matter what

 * branching and merging
	* merging actually preserves change history instead of hiding it
	* merging is fast and easy

 * VERY helpful logging utility (try log --stat and log -p)

 * patch generation (git format-patch)
	* authors are preserved (committer is separate)
	* change log messages are preserved
	* binary diffs: all files are patchable
	* easy distributed development

 * all repositories are mergeable among each other (distributed development)

 * it's quote fast.. I've been using git at work, and it beats SVN
   in almost all operations

-- 
Heikki Orsila			Barbie's law:
heikki.orsila@iki.fi		"Math is hard, let's go shopping!"
http://www.iki.fi/shd

Re: On GSL version control

[Gerard Jungman]

On Tue, 2007-11-06 at 16:52 +0000, Brian Gough wrote:

> Thanks for your email.  I've been trying git out myself in recent
> weeks, and considering whether it is viable (for moving the repository
> to Savannah.gnu.org).

For what it's worth, I would be happy to change to git.
I've been using mercurial for all my own projects, but
I gather that git will do all of that and more.

--
G. Jungman

Re: On GSL version control

[Heikki Orsila]

On Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 03:26:38PM -0700, Gerard Jungman wrote:
> I've been using mercurial for all my own projects, but
> I gather that git will do all of that and more.

Mercurial would be nice too..

-- 
Heikki Orsila			Barbie's law:
heikki.orsila@iki.fi		"Math is hard, let's go shopping!"
http://www.iki.fi/shd

Re: On GSL version control

[Brian Gough]

At Tue, 06 Nov 2007 15:26:38 -0700,
Gerard Jungman wrote:
> For what it's worth, I would be happy to change to git.
> I've been using mercurial for all my own projects, but
> I gather that git will do all of that and more.

Ok, I'll look into making the change.