[Pkg-opencl-devel] Bug#767961: unblock pre-approval: beignet/0.9.3~really.0.8+dfsg-1

[Ivo De Decker]

Hi,

On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 10:19:25PM +0000, Rebecca N. Palmer wrote:
> >I didn't look at the details of the patch for #768090, but the bug log
> >suggests that there are remaining failures. Is that still the case with this
> >patch?
> 
> Assuming you mean
> >The remaining test failures are:
> >-cospi/sinpi/tanpi, powr/pown/pow, tgamma are less accurate than the
> >OpenCL spec requires (at least the first group explicitly use the
> >fast-but-inaccurate path, 2e-5 instead of 1e-8 typical relative error
> >but 10-20x faster; one reason 0.9 is "faster" is that it has sin/cos/tan
> >do the same by default).
> >-sub_bufffer_check sometimes crashes.
> yes, it's the same patch so has the same failures: I don't claim
> this is perfect, just the best we can reasonably do within the
> freeze rules.
> 
> In current upstream (1.0), the crash is gone and a non-default
> "strict conformance" mode is added where cospi/sinpi/tanpi meet the
> accuracy standard, but powr/pown/pow and tgamma still fail.

OK.

> >you can use a version like 1:0.8+dfsg-1 in unstable if you don't like
> >0.9.3~really.0.8+dfsg-1
> Please don't do that: I'd rather have a temporary ~really than a
> (permanent) epoch.

An epoch isn't that bad, but some people don't like it. As I said, both
1:0.8+dfsg-1 and 0.9.3~really.0.8+dfsg-1 are fine for me. Just ping this bug
when the package is in unstable.

Cheers,

Ivo