Done. On 22/02/2008, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Feb 22, 11:20 pm, "John Cremona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Built ok (kubuntu 7.70, gcc version 4.1.3 20070929 (prerelease) > > (Ubuntu 4.1.2-16ubuntu2)) > > > Hi John, > > > > The following tests failed: > > > > sage -t devel/sage-main/sage/rings/number_field/number_field.py > > sage -t > devel/sage-main/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_ideal.py > > Total time for all tests: 2712.3 seconds > > Please see /home/jec/sage-2.10.2.rc0/tmp/test.log for the complete log > > from this test. > > > > Here are the details: > > > > sage -t > devel/sage-main/sage/rings/number_field/number_field.py********************************************************************** > > File "number_field.py", line 2619: > > sage: [Plist[i]==K.ideal(pilist[i]) for i in range(len(Plist))] > > Expected: > > [True, False, True] > > Got: > > [True, False, False] > > ********************************************************************** > > 1 items had failures: > > 1 of 13 in __main__.example_78 > > ***Test Failed*** 1 failures. > > For whitespace errors, see the file .doctest_number_field.py > > [21.8 s] > > sage -t devel/sage-main/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_base.pyx > > [2.9 s] > > sage -t devel/sage-main/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_element.pyx > > [6.9 s] > > sage -t > devel/sage-main/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_element_quadratic.pyx > > [2.8 s] > > sage -t > devel/sage-main/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_ideal.py********************************************************************** > > File "number_field_ideal.py", line 868: > > sage: I.prime_factors() > > Expected: > > [Fractional ideal (-w)] > > Got: > > [Fractional ideal (w)] > > ********************************************************************** > > > > The second one is an equivalent valid output, which can be fixed by > > changing the expected output. > > > > The first one is a doctest I wrote; I think it best to just delete > > the last line from the doctest (lines 2619, 2620) since (1) the > > factors produced by prime_factors() are not in a deterministic order > > (I think), and (2) the exact result in the failing line depends on > > what is returned by a pari function, which may also not be > > deterministic. But the rest of this block of tests is 100% ok. > > > Excellent. Could you then referee Craig's patch for both issues at > #2257? It is the last patch scheduled for 2.10.2, so then we can start > the release process. > > > John > > > > > Cheers, > > Michael > > >
-- John Cremona --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
