GNU bug report logs - #42141
blast+ is not reproducible

Previous Next

Package: guix;

Reported by: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>

Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 16:43:01 UTC

Severity: normal

Done: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


Message #38 received at 42141-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
To: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
Cc: 42141-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org, zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#42141: blast+ is not reproducible
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2022 17:20:57 -0400
Hi,

Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net> writes:

> zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 at 23:09, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> Fixed with commit 1ee2d117d8fa9e2e0d4ec46cc5555497bb5e6337.
>>>
>>> Yay!  Thank you!  And for my curiosity, how did I get the two build
>>> farms to agree on an identical build, as reported in 'guix challenge'?
>>>
>>> That is odd.
>>
>> Because blast+ is multi-outputs and ’out’ is fine contrary to ’include’:
>>
>> $ guix challenge blast+:include
>> /gnu/store/0kbsdr61qpj0vkc6s8g2kbp4dq936n0p-blast+-2.11.0-include contents differ:
>>   local hash: 0q4nssknlmc54m8abndn9bhrlwm4m28lkb75i1wnwr0ghbalj02x
>>   https://ci.guix.gnu.org/nar/lzip/0kbsdr61qpj0vkc6s8g2kbp4dq936n0p-blast%2B-2.11.0-include: 0q4nssknlmc54m8abndn9bhrlwm4m28lkb75i1wnwr0ghbalj02x
>>   https://bordeaux.guix.gnu.org/nar/lzip/0kbsdr61qpj0vkc6s8g2kbp4dq936n0p-blast%2B-2.11.0-include: 0cakizfsqb1lla62cmwnng1h9gvqgf3lyjk0k7lkiaisj713mpzx
>>   differing files:
>>     /include/ncbi-tools++/ncbi-tools++/ncbi_random_macro.h
>>     /include/ncbi-tools++/ncbi-tools++/ncbiconf_unix.h
>>
>> 1 store items were analyzed:
>>   - 0 (0.0%) were identical
>>   - 1 (100.0%) differed
>>   - 0 (0.0%) were inconclusive
>
> Ah, thanks for explaining!

Ah!  Shouldn't the default be to compare all outputs?  It seems that'd
be less surprising and useful.

What do you think?

-- 
Maxim




This bug report was last modified 2 years and 288 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.