update to libjxl 0.5 + disable building of man pages

[boegel]

fixes #13827

[boegel]

Test report by @boegel
FAILED
Build succeeded for 0 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total)
node2609.swalot.os - Linux centos linux 7.9.2009, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2660 v3 @ 2.60GHz (haswell), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/9b363f12e003549d959254a53d788185 for a full test report.

edit:

99% tests passed, 1 tests failed out of 1370

...

The following tests FAILED:
        962 - DecodeTest.PixelTestWithICCProfileLossy (Failed)
Errors while running CTest
make: *** [test] Error 8

[Micket]

Might want to delete the now leftover "openexr-3.0_compat" patch as well

[Micket]

Test report by @Micket
FAILED
Build succeeded for 0 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total)
alvis-c1 - Linux centos linux 7.9.2009, x86_64, Intel Xeon Processor (Skylake), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/05175281cf6214f7ccf366525df5f52d for a full test report.

[Micket]

Same test fails for me

/local/EB/build/libjxl/0.5/GCCcore-10.3.0/libjxl-0.5/lib/jxl/decode_test.cc:1751: Failure
Expected: (ButteraugliDistance(io0, io1, ba, nullptr, nullptr)) <= (2.4f), actual: 236.786 vs 2.4

It's not even close

[Micket]

I asked the devs. It this doesn't make it for the release, we can consider dropping the previous 0.3.7 version until we have this fixed. I have no pressing need to get it included in 4.4.2

[Micket]

Seems to be confirmed as a bug.

1. We could use skcms instead. It's a lot messier, in particular because there is no way to download the skcms sources with a predictable checksum.
2. We could remove libjxl for the next release, making it easier to switch to a good version in the future.
3. Skip this failing test and release as is

[boegel]

@boegelbot please test @ generoso
CORE_CNT=16

[boegelbot]

@boegel: Request for testing this PR well received on generoso

PR test command 'EB_PR=13829 EB_ARGS= /apps/slurm/default/bin/sbatch --job-name test_PR_13829 --ntasks="16" ~/boegelbot/eb_from_pr_upload_generoso.sh' executed!

• exit code: 0
• output:

Submitted batch job 18288

Test results coming soon (I hope)...

- notification for comment with ID 912667533 processed

Message to humans: this is just bookkeeping information for me,
it is of no use to you (unless you think I have a bug, which I don't).

[boegelbot]

Test report by @boegelbot
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total)
generoso-x-1 - Linux centos linux 8.2.2004, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2667 v3 @ 3.20GHz (haswell), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/6d3c52af5c2d8b13a181ec1b6ba37b2a for a full test report.

[Micket]

looks good enough to me, lets hope that one test is very niche

[boegel]

Test report by @boegel
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total)
node3129.skitty.os - Linux centos linux 7.9.2009, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6140 CPU @ 2.30GHz, Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/ebcdc11b2a98179016e343890abb90f6 for a full test report.

[Micket]

Test report by @Micket
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total)
vera-c1 - Linux centos linux 7.9.2009, x86_64, Intel Xeon Processor (Skylake), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/4c20783dff55dd80767d74eba8dc1cbb for a full test report.

[Micket]

Going in, thanks @boegel!