Not a surprise :/
Vít
Dne 22. 11. 21 v 23:01 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
I have merged the
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ruby/pull-request/103 and build
Ruby to fix the FTBFS. The upstream PR is not finalized yet, so I
expect some changes in the future. I also apologize in advance should
there be any unforeseen compatibility issue.
Vít
Dne 11. 11. 21 v 9:57 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
>
> There seems to be one legitimate issue with Puma:
>
>
https://github.com/ruby/openssl/pull/399#issuecomment-966103794
>
>
> Vít
>
>
> Dne 08. 11. 21 v 10:53 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
>>
>> Thx for checking. It seems both Eventmachine as well as Puma fails.
>> Neither of the failures looks related to OpenSSL, though.
>>
>> Puma is broken by RPM. I have pushed the fix:
>>
>>
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rubygem-puma/c/29a98a559d6f96e47e7aefc...
>>
>>
>> Vít
>>
>>
>> Dne 08. 11. 21 v 2:46 Pavel Valena napsal(a):
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 9:14 PM Vít Ondruch <vondruch(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ruby/pull-request/103
>>>
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>> it looks good.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This ^^ is first draft of Ruby which should be compatible with
>>> OpenSSL
>>> 3.x. So far, I was just successful to build the package including
>>> passing the test suite. Nevertheless:
>>>
>>> * Some test cases are disabled, because they fail even upstream
>>>
>>> * Upstream is not done with the patch set, so there will be
>>> eventually
>>> changes. But I'd like to fix the FTBFS ASAP.
>>>
>>> * The patches needs to be renamed and described and what not.
>>>
>>> * There are certainly quite a few deprecation warnings during
>>> build, but
>>> I'm not going to fix them. Preferring smaller patch set + better
>>> backward compatibility over them
>>>
>>> * I have not tested anything else, not even if it installs and
>>> if e.g.
>>> some gem can be installed.
>>>
>>>
>>> It seems to work ok. I've also succeeded creating and running a new
>>> Rails app (using Rails from Fedora).
>>>
>>>
>>> * It would deserve test mass rebuild, or at least mass rebuild of
>>> packages which are currently FTBFS, such as Puma and possibly
>>> event machine.
>>>
>>>
>>> There is probably lot more what is wrong with the PR, so please
>>> don't
>>> merge it yet, but feel free to give it try. I just wanted to
>>> share my
>>> progress and save the work :)
>>>
>>>
>>> To test, I've built it in my testing COPR:
>>>
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/pvalena/ruby-testing/build/2934888/
>>>
>>> I've also run gems rebuilds of dependent packages in an
>>> accompanying COPR:
>>>
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/pvalena/rubygems-testing/builds/
>>> (starting with 2934971)
>>>
>>> There're multiple buildroots, so to if the build failed, you need
>>> to be check for rawhide buildroot specifically(I'll fix this next
>>> time). I'll check for any errors with my automation.
>>>
>>> Pavel
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Vít
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ruby-sig mailing list --ruby-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>>> To unsubscribe send an email toruby-sig-leave(a)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.fed...
>>> Do not reply to spam on the list, report
it:https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure