ruby-sig February 2022

ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org

4 participants
6 discussions

Latest RSpec issues?
by Vít Ondruch 10 Mar '22

10 Mar '22

Dear Mamoru, Could you please check the following two packages which recently started to fail? https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/rubygem-webmock?collection=f36 https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/rubygem-websocket-extensions?coll… I suspect that this is related to the RSpec update, but the errors are quite strange on the first look: ~~~ 1) WebMock::RequestSignature initialization assigns normalized headers Failure/Error: @headers = WebMock::Util::Headers.normalize_headers(headers) #<WebMock::Util::Headers (class)> received :normalize_headers with unexpected arguments expected: ({"A"=>"a"}) got: ({"A"=>"a"}) # ./lib/webmock/request_signature.rb:25:in `headers=' # ./lib/webmock/request_signature.rb:49:in `assign_options' # ./lib/webmock/request_signature.rb:11:in `initialize' # ./spec/unit/request_signature_spec.rb:23:in `new' # ./spec/unit/request_signature_spec.rb:23:in `block (3 levels) in <top (required)>' # ./lib/webmock/rspec.rb:37:in `block (2 levels) in <top (required)>' ~~~ Thx a lot Vít P.S. Sorry for not being more helpful, I have to spent some time with CentOS Stream 9 to get Ruby into shape there, especially the problematic SystemTap support [1]. [1] https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/18257

2 4

rspec 3.11.0 hits rawhide/f36
by Mamoru TASAKA 14 Feb '22

14 Feb '22

Hello, ruby-sig folks: I've upgraded rubygem-rspec (and its friends: rspec-core, rspec-expectations, rspec-mocks, rspec-support) to 3.11.0. Please try using this, thank you. Note that the change Vít previously mentioned (i.e. https://github.com/rspec/rspec-mocks/issues/1460 https://github.com/rspec/rspec-mocks/pull/1394 ) is still in effect. Some rspec usage, espcially using "with" syntax may need updating. Regards, Mamoru

2 2

Ruby 3.1 - Mass rebuild
by Vít Ondruch 07 Feb '22

07 Feb '22

Hi, It is time of the year when new version of Ruby was released upstream and we should land it in Fedora. Unfortunately, the change proposal was approved just last Thursday and on top of that, rebase of libffi broke Ruby (I am going to disable the failing test cases for the moment and hope for the best). So this brings us into situation, where won't have enough time prior Fedora Mass rebuild. I have discussed this a bit with relengs and one of the options would be to build Ruby early during the mass rebuild and fix the outfall later. I shared the proposal in the Fedora Mass rebuild ticket [2]. One downside would be that in case of problems, we could not trigger our contingency plan, which is "drop our side tag". But I hope we won't need that. Any thoughts? My fist concern is that maybe we should build more then just Ruby. rubygem-json comes to my mind and possibly rubygem-nokogiri? Vít [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2040380 [2] https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10538#comment-775197

3 40

Re: List of long term FTBFS packages to be retired in March
by Mamoru TASAKA 02 Feb '22

02 Feb '22

Miro Hrončok wrote on 2022/02/01 23:08: > Dear maintainers. > > Based on the current fail to build from source policy, the following packages > should be retired from Fedora 36 approximately one week before branching. > > However, 5 weekly reminders are required and I forgot to start this sooner, > hence the retirement will happen in 5 weeks, i.e. March 1st 2022. > Since this is after the Beta Freeze, > I will skip retiring components with depending packages. > Such components will be retired during the next release cycle, > and are included in this report for completeness. > > Policy: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Fails_to_build_from_source_Fails… > > The packages in rawhide were not successfully built at least since Fedora 33. > > This report is based on dist tags. > > Packages collected via: > https://github.com/hroncok/fedora-report-ftbfs-retirements/blob/master/ftbf… > > If you see a package that was built, please let me know. > If you see a package that should be exempted from the process, please let me know and we can work together to get a FESCo approval for that. > > If you see a package that can be rebuilt, please do so. > > Package (co)maintainers > ================================================================================ <snip> > rubygem-cucumber-rails mmorsi, vondruch > rubygem-selenium-webdriver mmorsi, ruby-packagers-sig, vondruch > rubygem-sup dcallagh, jaruga, ruby-packagers-sig, shreyankg <snip> > > Depending on: rubygem-selenium-webdriver (21) > Too many dependencies for rubygem-selenium-webdriver, not all listed here Here, it seems rubygem-cucumber-rails rubygem-sup have no impact on other packages. rubygem-selenium-webdriver has huge impact on other packages: Although runtime dependency has no impact: $ dnf repoquery --quiet --repo=koji-36 --qf '%{sourcerpm}' --whatrequires rubygem-selenium-webdriver rubygem-selenium-webdriver-3.142.7-3.fc33.src.rpm BuildRequires has huge impact: $ dnf repoquery --arch=src --quiet --repo=koji-36-source --recursive --whatrequires "rubygem(selenium-webdriver)" rubygem-actionpack-1:6.1.4.1-2.fc36.src rubygem-actiontext-0:6.1.4.1-2.fc36.src rubygem-capybara-0:3.34.0-5.fc36.src rubygem-cucumber-rails-0:1.8.0-5.fc33.src rubygem-rspec-rails-0:4.0.2-3.fc36.src For capybara: $ dnf repoquery --arch=src --quiet --repo=koji-36-source --recursive --whatrequires "rubygem(capybara)" rubygem-actionpack-1:6.1.4.1-2.fc36.src rubygem-actiontext-0:6.1.4.1-2.fc36.src rubygem-cucumber-rails-0:1.8.0-5.fc33.src rubygem-railties-0:6.1.4.1-2.fc36.src rubygem-rspec-rails-0:4.0.2-3.fc36.src rubygem-simplecov-0:0.13.0-12.fc36.src Can someone investigate rubygem-selenium-webdriver build failure? Thank you in advance. BTW, for rubygem-simplecov, I've found that rubygem-capybara (so rubygem-selenium-webdriver) BR dependency can easily be removed. Regards, Mamoru

1 0

Question about redmine
by Peter Boy 01 Feb '22

01 Feb '22

Hi, we are using redmine as our project management tool and installation and maintenance is a bit cumbersome. Having a Fedora package would make it a lot easier. Has someone already tried to create a Fedora package of Redmine? Or are there specific issues that make it difficult to create a rpm? I'm wondering that no rpm distribution includes a Redmine package. There is a third party package, but it is non-functional. Thanks Peter

4 9

rubygem(rake) runtime dependency removed from rubygem-rspec-core
by Mamoru TASAKA 01 Feb '22

01 Feb '22

Hello, ruby-sig folks: With PR: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rubygem-rspec-core/pull-request/4 I removed rubygem(rake) Requires (when using on koji buildroot) on: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rubygem-rspec-core/c/15e3de8d5ccf32c7199… Note that some of rubygems related packages becan to fail to rebuild due to this change, especially on %check stage, e.g. * rubygem-rspec-{core,expectations,mocks} * rubygem-cucumber I am going to add "BR: rubygem(rake)" for those packages when I notice such issues, but if you find it, just add "BR: rubygem(rake)" to satisfy dependency. Regards, Mamoru

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

ruby-sig February 2022