numpy build issue on i7-2600K CPU
Hello, building numpy 1.6.1rc2 on Windows, i7-2600K CPU, with msvc9 failed with the following error: File "numpy/core/setup_common.py", line 271, in long_double_representation raise ValueError("Could not lock sequences (%s)" % saw) ValueError: Could not lock sequences (None) This problem has been mentioned before at <http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/2011-March/055571.html>. Opening the configtest.obj file in binary mode fixed the issue for me. A patch is attached. Christoph
Hi Christoph, On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 3:57 AM, Christoph Gohlke <cgohlke@uci.edu> wrote:
Hello,
building numpy 1.6.1rc2 on Windows, i7-2600K CPU, with msvc9 failed with the following error:
File "numpy/core/setup_common.py", line 271, in long_double_representation raise ValueError("Could not lock sequences (%s)" % saw) ValueError: Could not lock sequences (None)
This problem has been mentioned before at <http://mail.scipy.org/** pipermail/numpy-discussion/**2011-March/055571.html<http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/2011-March/055571.html>
.
Opening the configtest.obj file in binary mode fixed the issue for me. A patch is attached.
I did see this, just not before I tagged 1.6.1rc3. If it's reviewed/tested I think it's a simple enough change that it can go in without requiring a new RC. Cheers, Ralf
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 9:31 PM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers@googlemail.com>wrote:
Hi Christoph,
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 3:57 AM, Christoph Gohlke <cgohlke@uci.edu> wrote:
Hello,
building numpy 1.6.1rc2 on Windows, i7-2600K CPU, with msvc9 failed with the following error:
File "numpy/core/setup_common.py", line 271, in long_double_representation raise ValueError("Could not lock sequences (%s)" % saw) ValueError: Could not lock sequences (None)
This problem has been mentioned before at <http://mail.scipy.org/** pipermail/numpy-discussion/**2011-March/055571.html<http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/2011-March/055571.html>
.
Opening the configtest.obj file in binary mode fixed the issue for me. A patch is attached.
I did see this, just not before I tagged 1.6.1rc3. If it's reviewed/tested I think it's a simple enough change that it can go in without requiring a new RC.
This looks like a correct fix to me, and I planned to test it on Windows and push it to master first. But since master doesn't compile on Windows for me at the moment I can't do that, and I don't really want to only push it to 1.6.x. So it may have to wait till 1.6.2/1.7.0.
Ralf
participants (2)
-
Christoph Gohlke -
Ralf Gommers