Oh cool! I'll have to try that out once this is merged.

@tgamblin

I like making Spack run faster. But I'd like to make sure that there is a way to bootstrap a Spack-installed cYaml if the system doesn't provide one. We can't count on system cYaml being available, or the user being able to install it if it is; and once a few of these "improvements" pile up, it will become increasingly necessary to use them to experience Spack as it is intended.

We just need to add libyaml to spack and then it's easy to bootstrap.

@tgamblin Do you think this is worth a new row in the test matrix (one in which we pip install yaml before running the tests) ?

I think we should test by spack install yaml before running the tests.

On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 5:39 AM, Massimiliano Culpo <
[email protected]> wrote:

@tgamblin https://github.com/tgamblin Do you think this is worth a new
row in the test matrix (one in which we pip install yaml before running
the tests) ?

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#2010 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AB1cdwcGXhcYgDsKZ2y5Zd4yvlMBRXkGks5qz03SgaJpZM4KVUX_
.

pip install yaml would be much quicker than spack install yaml. If the goal is to make the tests go faster (and be more likely to succeed within the global timeout), then I think pip would work better. No reason to test Spack's yaml package for every commit to Spack if no one is editing it. That would fit better in the package-specific tests I outlined in #1576.

Let me submit a PR and see if it affects the timing at all.

Sounds reasonable.

On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Adam J. Stewart [email protected]
wrote:

pip install yaml would be much quicker than spack install yaml. If the
goal is to make the tests go faster (and be more likely to succeed within
the global timeout
https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/common-build-problems/#My-builds-are-timing-out),
then I think pip would work better. No reason to test Spack's yaml package
for every commit to Spack if no one is editing it. That would fit better in
the package-specific tests I outlined in #1576
#1576.

Let me submit a PR and see if it affects the timing at all.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#2010 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AB1cd-VsHnAWVySOvGdCjWkk0ItfSEtVks5qz57tgaJpZM4KVUX_
.

@alalazo I think that's a good idea. I was going to say that YAML is really stable -- 3.11 came out in 2014, but new versions of pyyaml and libyaml actually just came out. So I think it would be useful to test.

@tgamblin : After this merge, on bluegene-q system I see following:

$ ./bin/spack --version
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "./bin/spack", line 98, in <module>
    import spack
  File "/home/kumbhar/tmp_tk/spack/lib/spack/spack/__init__.py", line 74, in <module>
    repo = spack.repository.RepoPath()
  File "/home/kumbhar/tmp_tk/spack/lib/spack/spack/repository.py", line 131, in __init__
    repo_dirs = spack.config.get_config('repos')
  File "/home/kumbhar/tmp_tk/spack/lib/spack/spack/config.py", line 403, in get_config
    data = scope.get_section(section)
  File "/home/kumbhar/tmp_tk/spack/lib/spack/spack/config.py", line 248, in get_section
    data   = _read_config_file(path, schema)
  File "/home/kumbhar/tmp_tk/spack/lib/spack/spack/config.py", line 323, in _read_config_file
    data = syaml.load(f)
  File "/home/kumbhar/tmp_tk/spack/lib/spack/spack/util/spack_yaml.py", line 213, in load
    return yaml.load(*args, **kwargs)
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/yaml/__init__.py", line 71, in load
    return loader.get_single_data()
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/yaml/constructor.py", line 37, in get_single_data
    node = self.get_single_node()
  File "_yaml.pyx", line 702, in _yaml.CParser.get_single_node (ext/_yaml.c:7647)
  File "_yaml.pyx", line 905, in _yaml.CParser._parse_next_event (ext/_yaml.c:10396)
yaml.reader.ReaderError: unacceptable character #x0000: control characters are not allowed
  in "/home/kumbhar/tmp_tk/spack/etc/spack/defaults/repos.yaml", position 546

If I go to the commit previous to this merge, it works fine:

$ git checkout b27f4e3aebf6c1ecbefffc22a9a27a4fe9ce0ab3
$ ./bin/spack --version
0.9.1

(note that this happens on one of the three bg-q system where I am trying)

Can you attach /home/kumbhar/tmp_tk/spack/etc/spack/repos.yaml?

$ ll spack/etc/spack/repos.yaml
ls: cannot access spack/etc/spack/repos.yaml: No such file or directory

do you mean spack/etc/spack/defaults/repos.yaml? (its unmodified, i cloned new repo for testing).
repos.yaml.txt