On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 08:20:06AM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 08:13:08AM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 07:53:46PM +0200, Sahana Prasad wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 12:57 PM Petr Menšík <pemensik@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Sahana,
> > > >
> > > > it would be nice, if changelog entry contained bug id we could use to
> > > > watch the progress. Or any other link to some tracker. bind package has a
> > > > new release, I am preparing update for it, but I am not sure where should I
> > > > watch for a progress. Even build of openssl itself does not reference any
> > > > bug. Is there any better tracker than bug #1825937, which I can monitor for
> > > > progress? Is the koji build the best way to check readiness? Does exist any
> > > > variant of RHEL9 bug #1958021
> > > > <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1958021> for Fedora Rawhide?
> > > >
> > > > Is there any expected timeline, how long it might take to merge the
> > > > side-tag?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hi Petr,
> > >
> > > I have merged the side-tag [1].
> > > I would however need karma for it to get to stable.
> > >
> > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-ee8c904f46
> > >
> > > I will send a list of the failed packages shortly.
> >
> > systemd was built into the side-tag yesterday [1],
> > but doesn't appear in the update…
> >
> > [1] https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1832196
>
> Oh, I see it finished building after you merged the tag. Dunno,
> maybe the update should be updated?
>
> --
>
> Another issue: the update has 1006 "automated tests", out of which
> 1001 fail! I think is very wrong with "automated tests" is the
> out-of-the-box success rate is below 0.005%.
>
> Error:
>  Problem: conflicting requests
>   - nothing provides libcrypto.so.3()(64bit) needed by zola-0.12.2-8.fc36.x86_64
>   - nothing provides libcrypto.so.3(OPENSSL_3.0.0)(64bit) needed by zola-0.12.2-8.fc36.x86_64
>   - nothing provides libssl.so.3()(64bit) needed by zola-0.12.2-8.fc36.x86_64
>   - nothing provides libssl.so.3(OPENSSL_3.0.0)(64bit) needed by zola-0.12.2-8.fc36.x86_64
> (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
> Installation of zola-0:0.12.2-8.fc36.x86_64 failed.
>
> So... is the test ignoring the fact that the package is part of
> an update and trying to install rpms individually?

Another one (https://osci-jenkins-1.ci.fedoraproject.org/job/fedora-ci/job/rpminspect-pipeline/job/master/42395/testReport/(root)/tests/_annocheck/)

"""
Error Message
Test "/annocheck" failed.
Find out more about this test in the documentation: https://github.com/rpminspect/rpminspect#rpminspect
Found a bug? Please open an issue in the issue tracker: https://pagure.io/fedora-ci/general/issues
"""

How on earth are we supposed to figure out what annocheck doesn't like?
There's 185328 bytes of "Standard Output" that follows…

Zbyszek
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@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/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure