Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Python-eccodes version numbering changed again, Travis is testing against an old version #3723

Closed
stephenworsley opened this issue Jun 2, 2020 · 7 comments

Comments

@stephenworsley
Copy link
Contributor

Python-eccodes previously changed their version numbering convention which resulted in #3593 being necessary in order to keep Travis using the latest version. Recently, python-eccodes has changed their version numbering convention again (see https://anaconda.org/conda-forge/python-eccodes/files) so that the changes made in #3593 are now causing Travis to not install the latest version. In order to pick up the latest version again, the changes made in #3593 should be reverted.

@pp-mo
Copy link
Member

pp-mo commented Jun 2, 2020

AFAICT the problem here is not that the numbering system has changed.
It is that they have provided 2 builds for the same "version" (2020.04.0) without incrementing the build number. Which is simply a thing you must never do in a conda channel !!

E.G. the file "linux-64/python-eccodes-2020.04.0-py36hda16e5c_0.tar.bz2" dates to 2020-05-04 @14:25
And its info/recipe/meta.yaml has

package:
    name: python-eccodes
    version: 2020.04.0
source:
    sha256: b2589c1850d0906d5b22bf699c0977736a704ee35799e4ea618e253332793ac4
    url: https://github.com/ecmwf/eccodes-python/archive/2020.04.0.tar.gz
build:
    number: '0'
    string: py36hda16e5c_0

The file "linux-64/python-eccodes-2020.04.0-py38h8790de6_0.tar.bz2" dates to 2020-05-04 @14:29
(5 minutes later !)
And it contains "conflicting" version info

package:
    name: python-eccodes
    version: 2020.04.0
source:
    sha256: b2589c1850d0906d5b22bf699c0977736a704ee35799e4ea618e253332793ac4
    url: https://github.com/ecmwf/eccodes-python/archive/2020.04.0.tar.gz
build:
    number: '0'
    string: py38h8790de6_0

@trexfeathers
Copy link
Contributor

While the 2 identical builds is doubtless a very bad thing to do, we shouldn't be encountering this issue at all while Travis is still pinned to the following:

python-eccodes">=0.9.1, <2"

Version 2020 is most definitely >2!

@pp-mo
Copy link
Member

pp-mo commented Jun 2, 2020

Version 2020 is most definitely >2!

I don't really understand that aspect.
It also appears, from comparing the two meta.yaml files, that they are nailing tight many dependencies, so one of the above is fixed to python 3.6, and the other 3.8.

@pp-mo
Copy link
Member

pp-mo commented Jun 2, 2020

Ok, I suspect this could be "what I just said", and not the version spec in travis.yml.
The problem may be that .travis.yml doesn't integrate eccodes with the original environment resolution, but installs it in a secondary step.

So, I think the eccodes "meta.yaml" for the python 3.6 version now requires exactly "python=3.6.9",
whereas we are trying to install in the environment we just created, which has 3.6.10.
According to https://travis-ci.org/github/SciTools/iris/jobs/691806720

So it might be installing the earlier one because it has a looser Python version requirement ??
I'll just check that out ...

UPDATE: I think I'm all wrong about this.
will update later..

@pp-mo
Copy link
Member

pp-mo commented Jun 2, 2020

Update : removing the pin gives segfaults
Maybe we need to pause here, and schedule work to address it at a better time :-(

@pp-mo
Copy link
Member

pp-mo commented Jun 2, 2020

removing the pin gives segfaults

Until the next iris-grib, which will fix it : SciTools/iris-grib#208

@pp-mo pp-mo added this to the v3.0.0 milestone Jun 30, 2020
@lbdreyer
Copy link
Member

We no longer install eccodes into Travis, so this can be closed

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants