yaml-0.8.22 test suite failures

[peti]

Citing from http://hydra.nixos.org/build/49412471/nixlog/1/raw:

  test/Data/YamlSpec.hs:453: 
  1) Data.Yaml.numbers integers have no decimals
       expected: "1\n"
        but got: "1\n...\n"

[snoyberg]

It's due to an upgrade within the yaml package to the most recent version of the libyaml library. Nix is probably not using the latest code, which includes a bugfix to remove the extraneous ...\n.

[peti]

We are using version 0.1.7, which seems to be the latest version at http://pyyaml.org/download/libyaml/. Is there a newer one?

[snoyberg]

No official release, I'm using master from: https://github.com/yaml/libyaml I was pinged about it on the issue tracker by the new maintainer.

…

On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:46 PM, Peter Simons ***@***.***> wrote: We are using version 0.1.7, which seems to be the latest version at http://pyyaml.org/download/libyaml/. Is there a newer one? — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#106 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AADBB6aPaue5dEBzNn4MbJVlCK3Mb3L1ks5rhCUtgaJpZM4MOZiy> .

[peti]

So, basically, you're making it impossible to use this code with any released version of libyaml.

[snoyberg]

I'm not going to debate with hyperbole or baseless claims. The code works, the test suite requires a newer version. I'm done discussing this.

…

On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Peter Simons ***@***.***> wrote: So, basically, you're making it impossible to use this code with any released version of libyaml. — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#106 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AADBB95lL2g5ztA6wCxwhzjzVuSnRD-cks5rhCsvgaJpZM4MOZiy> .

[peti]

Man, if you would have actually engaged in an educated technical discussion that weighs the respective advantages and disadvantages of your choice against each other and displays some insight into the apparent conflicting interests at play here, then my head would probably have exploded.

[snoyberg]

Your statement was objectively false, the yaml package continues to work with older library versions. I have no intention of wasting time arguing against objectively false statements. There are plenty of trade-offs here worth considering, but you've made me completely uninterested in engaging in that with you. I've spent about 15 minutes more on this issue than I wish I had. Consider finding a way in the future to comment on issues without making me sorry I even opened the email.

[peti]

Well, I cannot tell whether yaml works reliably with older releases of libyaml or not. All I can tell is that the test suite fails consistently, which one would generally assume to be indicative of an interoperability problem, no? If the library works fine with libyaml 0.1.7, then IMHO it would be great of the test suite would succeed, too. As it is now, I can choose two between 2 courses of action going forward in Nixpkgs:

1. Build with -fsystem but disable the test suite. This sucks from a maintenance point of view, because no-one is going to remember to re-enable that test suite if a new libyaml version comes out, so we're quite likely to be ending up distributing untested code.

2. Build with -f-system, which sucks too, because now the yaml package duplicates a system resource for no obvious reason, which means it might miss out on security relevant bug fixes, etc., that would otherwise have made it into the build transparently.

From my point of view as a distributor, your choice to bundle a random git version of libyaml and to make your test suite depend on that particular version is awkward, at best.