[Pkg-rust-maintainers] Bug#1134963: rust-num-prime: FTBFS: flaky tests?
Sebastian Ramacher
sramacher at debian.org
Sun Apr 26 14:22:26 BST 2026
Source: rust-num-prime
Version: 0.4.4-2
Severity: serious
Tags: ftbfs
Justification: fails to build from source (but built successfully in the past)
X-Debbugs-Cc: sramacher at debian.org
Dear maintainer,
rust-num-prime FTBFS on amd64 and riscv64 with:
failures:
---- rand::tests::rand_prime stdout ----
thread 'rand::tests::rand_prime' (996) panicked at src/nt_funcs.rs:837:36:
index out of bounds: the len is 54 but the index is 54
stack backtrace:
0: __rustc::rust_begin_unwind
at /usr/src/rustc-1.94.1/library/std/src/panicking.rs:689:5
1: core::panicking::panic_fmt
at /usr/src/rustc-1.94.1/library/core/src/panicking.rs:80:14
2: core::panicking::panic_bounds_check
at /usr/src/rustc-1.94.1/library/core/src/panicking.rs:271:5
3: num_prime::nt_funcs::next_prime
at /usr/share/cargo/registry/num-prime-0.4.4/src/nt_funcs.rs:837:36
4: num_prime::rand::<impl num_prime::traits::RandPrime<u8> for R>::gen_prime
at /usr/share/cargo/registry/num-prime-0.4.4/src/rand.rs:22:45
5: num_prime::rand::<impl num_prime::traits::RandPrime<u8> for R>::gen_safe_prime
at /usr/share/cargo/registry/num-prime-0.4.4/src/rand.rs:51:34
6: num_prime::rand::tests::rand_prime
at /usr/share/cargo/registry/num-prime-0.4.4/src/rand.rs:226:25
7: num_prime::rand::tests::rand_prime::{{closure}}
at /usr/share/cargo/registry/num-prime-0.4.4/src/rand.rs:210:20
8: core::ops::function::FnOnce::call_once
at /usr/src/rustc-1.94.1/library/core/src/ops/function.rs:250:5
9: core::ops::function::FnOnce::call_once
at /usr/src/rustc-1.94.1/library/core/src/ops/function.rs:250:5
note: Some details are omitted, run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=full` for a verbose backtrace.
failures:
rand::tests::rand_prime
test result: FAILED. 22 passed; 1 failed; 0 ignored; 0 measured; 0 filtered out; finished in 0.38s
error: test failed, to rerun pass `--lib`
See
https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=rust-num-prime&arch=amd64&ver=0.4.4-2%2Bb1&stamp=1776894474&raw=0
for details.
It didin't fail on other arches, so this could be flaky tests.
cheers
--
Sebastian Ramacher
More information about the Pkg-rust-maintainers
mailing list