Conversation
This test triggers the following bug on cysignals 1.12.0 - 1.12.2:
```
Python 3.13.1 (main, Dec 14 2024, 12:44:03) [GCC 13.2.0] on linux
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> import cypari2
>>> from cysignals.alarm import alarm
>>> try:
... alarm(0.5)
... while True: pass
... except:
... pass
...
>>> cypari2.Pari()
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<python-input-3>", line 1, in <module>
cypari2.Pari()
~~~~~~~~~~~~^^
File "cypari2/pari_instance.pyx", line 471, in cypari2.pari_instance.Pari.__cinit__
File "cypari2/closure.pyx", line 138, in cypari2.closure._pari_init_closure
cysignals.signals.AlarmInterrupt
```
There was a typo in sagemath#181: when the pari sigint handling was converted to a general mechanism, the line ``` PARI_SIGINT_pending = 0; ``` got translated into ``` custom_signal_unblock(); ``` instead of the correct ``` custom_set_pending_signal(0); ``` This error didn't take effect until sagemath#166 removed the pari sigint handling. This causes some doctest failures in sagemath: ``` src/sage/coding/linear_code.py src/sage/geometry/integral_points.pxi src/sage/rings/integer.pyx src/sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_element.pyx ``` related to mishandling of AlarmInterrupt. See: https://github.com/sagemath/cysignals/pull/181/files#r1904885037
|
Cygwin build still fails - it now can find mesonpy, but still fails pretty fast, and the log shows that meson mixes toolsets quite badly. |
|
ninja (invoked from meson?) picks up wrong Python headers - instead of Cygwin's Python, it takes native ones, oops: |
|
I've no idea why this is failing now - there were no changes to this workflow and also no updates to the cygwin action...very strange. |
|
maybe a change to the host environment? |
|
there is also an error related to chocolatey shown in the log, some kind of version mismatch. |
|
I've opened egor-tensin/setup-cygwin#14 |
|
I eliminated the chocolatey warning in the action update, but it hasn't changed anything. I'm giving up. Let's disable the cygwin CI, maybe? |
It's running python 3.9 which we shouldn't waste time supporting anyway. In fact, I am needing some python 3.11 and maybe 3.12 to fix the I assume dropping python 3.9 is ok, but I'm not sure about python 3.10. |
https://scientific-python.org/specs/spec-0000/#2024---quarter-4 seems to suggest it might be ok to drop python 3.10 if necessary. |
cygwin is stuck on 3.9, so this seems like dead wood. |
trying to fix cygwin CI, cf #216