Dne 31. 05. 24 v 4:59 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a):
Hello, ruby-sig fPanu Matilainen wrote on 2024/05/29 21:31:Folks, rpm 4.20 alpha landed in rawhide today, and with the sheer amount of change that went into the bowels of the build code, this process is being rougher than usual. Apologies for the disruption and the late heads-up.Please file bugs with low bar to entry if you suspect an rpmbuild regression. It's better to have false positives than silent bugs or people working around the wrong things etc.So far we're aware of:- GenericError: srpm mismatch on subpackage debuginfo (so not any debuginfo, only subpackage debuginfo), is an rpm regression and we're working on a fix (see the other thread for more details)- java/mvn package fail on test-related paths https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2283795, this is not a regresion but an intended change in the rpm build paths layout where all builds now have a their own specific build-directory whether they use %setup or not.The build directory layout change is something the vast majority of packages will never notice, but packages manipulating paths relative to "raw" %{_builddir} *may* need to be adjusted.So again, if in doubt at all, ask or just file a bug.So now I tried rebuilding all rubygem-foo packages, and one additional packageis now FTBFS. * rubygem-abrt ``` Failures:1) ABRT #handle_exception logs error into syslog when can't communicate with ABRT daemon because no-one is listeing on the other side Failure/Error: expect(syslog).to receive(:err).with("%s", /can't communicate with ABRT daemon, is it running\? Connection refused -( connect\(2\) for)? "?#{socket_path}"?/)#<Double "syslog"> received :err with unexpected argumentsexpected: ("%s", /can't communicate with ABRT daemon, is it running\? Connection refused -( connect\(2\) for)? "?\/bui...ygem-abrt-0.4.0-build\/abrt-0.4.0\/usr\/share\/gems\/gems\/abrt-0.4.0\/spec\/abrt_handler_spec.rb"?/) got: ("%s", "can't communicate with ABRT daemon, is it running? too long unix socket path (114bytes given but 108bytes max)")Diff: @@ -1,3 +1,3 @@ ["%s",- /can't communicate with ABRT daemon, is it running\? Connection refused -( connect\(2\) for)? "?\/builddir\/build\/BUILD\/rubygem-abrt-0.4.0-build\/abrt-0.4.0\/usr\/share\/gems\/gems\/abrt-0.4.0\/spec\/abrt_handler_spec.rb"?/] + "can't communicate with ABRT daemon, is it running? too long unix socket path (114bytes given but 108bytes max)"] # ./spec/abrt_handler_spec.rb:140:in `block (5 levels) in <top (required)>'```So looks line %_builddir got longer than before, and the total path length for socket now exceeds the limitation:https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/unix.7.html
I had to check the current century in my calendar 🤦♂️😆 Thx for spotting this. I'll try to take a look, although not my highest priority ATM.
Vít
Regards, Mamoru -- _______________________________________________ ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.orgFedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelinesList Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- _______________________________________________ ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
