[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#861197: marked as done (unblock: glm/0.9.8.3-2)



Your message dated Tue, 25 Apr 2017 20:47:00 +0000
with message-id <286ded39-d9c2-7aa0-9123-0cf99853d7f9@thykier.net>
and subject line Re: Bug#861197: unblock: glm/0.9.8.3-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #861197,
regarding unblock: glm/0.9.8.3-2
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
861197: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=861197
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock

Please unblock package glm.

This fixes a FTBFS (#860701), caused by the test suite which caught an
infinite loop.

unblock glm/0.9.8.3-2

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 9.0
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (1001, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 4.9.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/12 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=nl_NL.utf8, LC_CTYPE=nl_NL.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
diff -Nru glm-0.9.8.3/debian/changelog glm-0.9.8.3/debian/changelog
--- glm-0.9.8.3/debian/changelog	2017-01-12 00:58:59.000000000 +0100
+++ glm-0.9.8.3/debian/changelog	2017-04-19 16:39:23.000000000 +0200
@@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
+glm (0.9.8.3-3) unstable; urgency=medium
+
+  * Fix FTBFS on i386. Closes: 860701
+
+ -- Guus Sliepen <guus@debian.org>  Wed, 19 Apr 2017 16:39:23 +0200
+
 glm (0.9.8.3-2) unstable; urgency=medium
 
   * Team upload
diff -Nru glm-0.9.8.3/debian/patches/fix-infiloop glm-0.9.8.3/debian/patches/fix-infiloop
--- glm-0.9.8.3/debian/patches/fix-infiloop	1970-01-01 01:00:00.000000000 +0100
+++ glm-0.9.8.3/debian/patches/fix-infiloop	2017-04-19 16:20:31.000000000 +0200
@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+Description: Fix potential infinite loop in float_distance()
+Author: Guus Sliepen <guus@debian.org>
+Last-Update: 2017-04-19
+
+--- glm-0.9.8.3.orig/glm/gtc/ulp.inl
++++ glm-0.9.8.3/glm/gtc/ulp.inl
+@@ -287,7 +287,7 @@ namespace glm
+ 		if(x < y)
+ 		{
+ 			T temp = x;
+-			while(temp != y)// && ulp < std::numeric_limits<std::size_t>::max())
++			while(temp < y)// && ulp < std::numeric_limits<std::size_t>::max())
+ 			{
+ 				++ulp;
+ 				temp = next_float(temp);
+@@ -296,7 +296,7 @@ namespace glm
+ 		else if(y < x)
+ 		{
+ 			T temp = y;
+-			while(temp != x)// && ulp < std::numeric_limits<std::size_t>::max())
++			while(temp < x)// && ulp < std::numeric_limits<std::size_t>::max())
+ 			{
+ 				++ulp;
+ 				temp = next_float(temp);
diff -Nru glm-0.9.8.3/debian/patches/fix-packing-test glm-0.9.8.3/debian/patches/fix-packing-test
--- glm-0.9.8.3/debian/patches/fix-packing-test	1970-01-01 01:00:00.000000000 +0100
+++ glm-0.9.8.3/debian/patches/fix-packing-test	2017-04-19 16:18:44.000000000 +0200
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+Description: Fix failure of gtc_packing test on i386 
+Author: Guus Sliepen <guus@debian.org>
+Last-Update: 2017-04-19
+
+--- glm-0.9.8.3.orig/test/gtc/gtc_packing.cpp
++++ glm-0.9.8.3/test/gtc/gtc_packing.cpp
+@@ -100,8 +100,8 @@ int test_Half4x16()
+ 		glm::u16vec4 p2 = glm::packHalf(v0);
+ 		glm::vec4 v2 = glm::unpackHalf(p2);
+ 
+-		Error += glm::all(glm::equal(v0, v1)) ? 0 : 1;
+-		Error += glm::all(glm::equal(v0, v2)) ? 0 : 1;
++		Error += !!memcmp(&v0, &v1, sizeof v0);
++		Error += !!memcmp(&v0, &v2, sizeof v0);
+ 	}
+ 
+ 	return Error;
+@@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ int test_I3x10_1x2()
+ 		glm::ivec4 v0 = glm::unpackI3x10_1x2(p0);
+ 		glm::uint32 p1 = glm::packI3x10_1x2(v0);
+ 		glm::ivec4 v1 = glm::unpackI3x10_1x2(p1);
+-		Error += glm::all(glm::equal(v0, v1)) ? 0 : 1;
++		Error += !!memcmp(&v0, &v1, sizeof v0);
+ 	}
+ 
+ 	return Error;
+@@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ int test_U3x10_1x2()
+ 		glm::uvec4 v0 = glm::unpackU3x10_1x2(p0);
+ 		glm::uint32 p1 = glm::packU3x10_1x2(v0);
+ 		glm::uvec4 v1 = glm::unpackU3x10_1x2(p1);
+-		Error += glm::all(glm::equal(v0, v1)) ? 0 : 1;
++		Error += !!memcmp(&v0, &v1, sizeof v0);
+ 	}
+ 
+ 	return Error;
+@@ -173,7 +173,7 @@ int test_Snorm3x10_1x2()
+ 		glm::vec4 v0 = glm::unpackSnorm3x10_1x2(p0);
+ 		glm::uint32 p1 = glm::packSnorm3x10_1x2(v0);
+ 		glm::vec4 v1 = glm::unpackSnorm3x10_1x2(p1);
+-		Error += glm::all(glm::equal(v0, v1)) ? 0 : 1;
++		Error += !!memcmp(&v0, &v1, sizeof v0);
+ 	}
+ 
+ 	return Error;
+@@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ int test_Unorm3x10_1x2()
+ 		glm::vec4 v0 = glm::unpackUnorm3x10_1x2(p0);
+ 		glm::uint32 p1 = glm::packUnorm3x10_1x2(v0);
+ 		glm::vec4 v1 = glm::unpackUnorm3x10_1x2(p1);
+-		Error += glm::all(glm::equal(v0, v1)) ? 0 : 1;
++		Error += !!memcmp(&v0, &v1, sizeof v0);
+ 	}
+ 
+ 	return Error;
+@@ -221,6 +221,7 @@ int test_F2x11_1x10()
+ 		glm::vec3 v0 = glm::unpackF2x11_1x10(p0);
+ 		glm::uint32 p1 = glm::packF2x11_1x10(v0);
+ 		glm::vec3 v1 = glm::unpackF2x11_1x10(p1);
++		Error += !!memcmp(&v0, &v1, sizeof v0);
+ 		Error += glm::all(glm::equal(v0, v1)) ? 0 : 1;
+ 	}
+ 
diff -Nru glm-0.9.8.3/debian/patches/series glm-0.9.8.3/debian/patches/series
--- glm-0.9.8.3/debian/patches/series	2017-01-12 00:58:59.000000000 +0100
+++ glm-0.9.8.3/debian/patches/series	2017-04-19 16:20:55.000000000 +0200
@@ -1 +1,3 @@
 Fix-CMake-package-version-file.patch
+fix-infiloop
+fix-packing-test

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Guus Sliepen:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: unblock
> 
> Please unblock package glm.
> 
> This fixes a FTBFS (#860701), caused by the test suite which caught an
> infinite loop.
> 
> unblock glm/0.9.8.3-2
> 
> [...]
>

Testing already have glm/0.9.8.3-3, which claims to have fixed #860701
(in the d/changelog).  I am closing this on the assumption that your
upload already have been unblocked.

Thanks,
~Niels

--- End Message ---

Reply to: