fitsIoWithOptions.py was added by Russell Owen about a month ago as part of DM-15599.

We're in Fall 2018, so type f18 and tab complete from there.

I suspect this is just the non-CameraMapper Mapper in the  pipe.tasks.mocks simulation code not acting like a CameraMapper (and Butler expecting a CameraMapper even though it claims to just need Mapper).  That would make this less critical, as it means the test code is spewing unnecessary warnings but no production code is actually broken.  But that of course should be verified, and it should be fixed anyway.

I meant more like tech debt or the like. It is not something that needs addressed right away. Might make for good pair programming or a diversion if someone needs a break.

I'm trying to debug this test right now (I've been modifying the internals of CoaddBase), and these warnings threw me off. A fix would be appreciated.

John Parejko, I think I've fixed the warnings described by Nate Lust on the tickets/DM-16082 of pipe_tasks if you want to rebase on that while debugging. 

Yusra AlSayyad, I'm also seeing some warnings that seem to be related to PSF matching; a lot of psf-matched warps don't seem to be produced that are expected.  At least some of those are due to

makeCoaddTempExp.warpAndPsfMatch INFO: Cannot PSF-Match: 

  File "src/math/Kernel.cc", line 197, in lsst::geom::Box2I lsst::afw::math::Kernel::shrinkBBox(const lsst::geom::Box2I&) const

    bbox dimensions = (22, 217) < (25, 25) in one or both dimensions {0}

lsst::pex::exceptions::InvalidParameterError: 'bbox dimensions = (22, 217) < (25, 25) in one or both dimensions'

...but at first glance it doesn't look like there are enough of those to account for all of the failed gets at the end of the logs.

I'll double check every warp is accounted for in the morning and write a less scary looking error message for that scenario, but I don't expect a warp to be created for those visits. Those visits are no where near the patch.

ds9 zscale calexp-0003*.fits deepCoadd_directWarp-00-1,1-0007.fits  & comparing with visit 7 just to get the quick outline. Top are the two calexps, and the bottom a rough boundary of 1,1.

The next two lines offer more clues: directWarp has 0 good pixels (0.0%)

makeCoaddTempExp INFO: Processing calexp 2 of 2 for this Warp: id=DataId(initialdata={'visit': 3, 'ccd': 2}, tag=set())

makeCoaddTempExp.warpAndPsfMatch.psfMatch INFO: compute Psf-matching kernel

makeCoaddTempExp.warpAndPsfMatch.psfMatch INFO: Padding Science PSF from (29, 29) to (35, 35) pixels

makeCoaddTempExp.warpAndPsfMatch.psfMatch INFO: Adjusted dimensions of reference PSF model from (27, 27) to (35, 35)

makeCoaddTempExp.warpAndPsfMatch.psfMatch INFO: Psf-match science exposure to reference

makeCoaddTempExp.warpAndPsfMatch INFO: Cannot PSF-Match: makeCoaddTempExp.warpAndPsfMatch INFO: Cannot PSF-Match: 

  File "src/math/Kernel.cc", line 197, in lsst::geom::Box2I lsst::afw::math::Kernel::shrinkBBox(const lsst::geom::Box2I &) const

    bbox dimensions = (22, 217) < (25, 25) in one or both dimensions {0}

lsst::pex::exceptions::InvalidParameterError: 'bbox dimensions = (22, 217) < (25, 25) in one or both dimensions'

makeCoaddTempExp INFO: directWarp has 0 good pixels (0.0%)

makeCoaddTempExp INFO: psfMatchedWarp has 0 good pixels (0.0%)

Just to note: rebasing to this branch definitely cleaned up a lot of (I assume unnecessary) errors and warnings. There were still quite a few others that Yusra AlSayyad told me were expected, when I was debugging DM-15751.

John Parejko, mind a quick review, since you're already playing with these changes?

Yusra AlSayyad, I think we've identified here that the other warnings are sufficiently different in nature that we should just merge what I've done here and consider that another ticket.

See comments on comments. When I ran it, it was less complainy, so that's good.