Bug#1108733: RuntimeError: operator torchvision::nms does not exist
Package: python3-torch
Version: 2.6.0+dfsg-7
Severity: important
Dear Maintainer,
* What led up to the situation?
I installed python3-pytorch and python3-torchvision and jupyterlab (on a machine without an nvidia or ATI GPU)
* What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or
ineffective)?
I then did
import torch
torch.hub.list('pytorch/vision',force_reload=True)
* What was the outcome of this action?
RuntimeError: operator torchvision::nms does not exist
* What outcome did you expect instead?
A list of models
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 13.0
APT prefers testing-security
APT policy: (500, 'testing-security'), (500, 'testing')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 6.12.33+deb13-amd64 (SMP w/16 CPU threads; PREEMPT)
Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_GB:en
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled
Versions of packages python3-torch depends on:
ii libc6 2.41-9
ii libgcc-s1 14.2.0-19
ii libopenmpi40 5.0.7-1
ii libprotobuf32t64 3.21.12-11
ii libpthreadpool0 0.0~git20240616.560c60d-1
ii libstdc++6 14.2.0-19
ii libtensorpipe0 0.0~git20220513.bb1473a-5+b3
ii libtorch-test 2.6.0+dfsg-7
ii libtorch2.6 2.6.0+dfsg-7
ii python3 [python3-supported-max] 3.13.3-1
ii python3-expecttest 0.3.0-1
ii python3-filelock 3.18.0-1
ii python3-fsspec 2025.3.2-1
ii python3-hypothesis 6.130.5-2
ii python3-jinja2 3.1.6-1
ii python3-networkx 3.2.1-5
ii python3-numpy 1:2.2.4+ds-1
ii python3-packaging 25.0-1
ii python3-pkg-resources 78.1.1-0.1
ii python3-psutil 7.0.0-2
ii python3-requests 2.32.3+dfsg-5
ii python3-sympy 1.13.3-5
ii python3-typing-extensions 4.13.2-1
ii python3-yaml 6.0.2-1+b2
ii python3.13 3.13.3-2
Versions of packages python3-torch recommends:
ii build-essential 12.12
ii libtorch-dev 2.6.0+dfsg-7
ii ninja-build 1.12.1-1
ii pybind11-dev 2.13.6-2
Versions of packages python3-torch suggests:
ii python3-pytest 8.3.5-2
-- no debconf information
Reply to: