Hello, ruby-sig folks: From devel list: Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote on 2023/09/22 23:01: > On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 10:43:05AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233281#c3 >> >> This probably answers my question. So heads up to others. >> >> Dne 22. 09. 23 v 10:39 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): >>> Was this implemented in past days? I am asking because this FTBFS >>> suggest so: >>> >>> https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/rubygem-timecop?collection=f40 > > Yes. The change was done in rawhide a while ago, but it got pushed to F39 > only recently, see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233281#c3. > > Zbyszek Now again I tried rebuilding all rubygem- packages, and now due to this tzdata removal changes, the following packages are now additionally FTBFS: rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml rubygem-globalid rubygem-haml rubygem-importmap-rails rubygem-jekyll rubygem-rails-controller-testing rubygem-sassc-rails rubygem-slim rubygem-sprockets-rails rubygem-timecop rubygem-web-console And all of these seems like: /usr/share/gems/gems/tzinfo-2.0.6/lib/tzinfo/data_sources/zoneinfo_data_source.rb:252:in `initialize': None of the paths included in TZInfo::DataSources::ZoneinfoDataSource.search_path are valid zoneinfo directories. (TZInfo::DataSources::ZoneinfoDirectoryNotFound) from /usr/share/gems/gems/tzinfo-2.0.6/lib/tzinfo/data_source.rb:157:in `new' from /usr/share/gems/gems/tzinfo-2.0.6/lib/tzinfo/data_source.rb:157:in `create_default_data_source' from /usr/share/gems/gems/tzinfo-2.0.6/lib/tzinfo/data_source.rb:55:in `block in get' from /usr/share/gems/gems/tzinfo-2.0.6/lib/tzinfo/data_source.rb:54:in `synchronize' from /usr/share/gems/gems/tzinfo-2.0.6/lib/tzinfo/data_source.rb:54:in `get' from /usr/share/gems/gems/activesupport-7.0.8/lib/active_support/railtie.rb:88:in `block in <class:Railtie>' from /usr/share/gems/gems/railties-7.0.8/lib/rails/initializable.rb:32:in `instance_exec' from /usr/share/gems/gems/railties-7.0.8/lib/rails/initializable.rb:32:in `run' from /usr/share/gems/gems/railties-7.0.8/lib/rails/initializable.rb:61:in `block in run_initializers' from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:231:in `block in tsort_each' from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:353:in `block (2 levels) in each_strongly_connected_component' from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:434:in `each_strongly_connected_component_from' from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:352:in `block in each_strongly_connected_component' from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:350:in `each' from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:350:in `call' from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:350:in `each_strongly_connected_component' from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:229:in `tsort_each' from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:208:in `tsort_each' from /usr/share/gems/gems/railties-7.0.8/lib/rails/initializable.rb:60:in `run_initializers' from /usr/share/gems/gems/railties-7.0.8/lib/rails/application.rb:372:in `initialize!' ..... So initializer of rails tries to initialize tzdata, and if it is not found exception is raised: The related code is: https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/fc734f28e65ef8829a1a939ee6702c1f349a1... So what is the proper fix for this? A. Make every package above have "BuildRequires: tzdata" B. Make rubygem-tzinfo or rubygem-activesupport have "Requires (not Recommends) tzdata" C. Or ask rubygem-activesupport upstream to make the code work even if tzdata is absent My current thought is that as currently RoR code explicitly requests to have tzdata installed, B. is the best option.

I agree. I was just thinking of adding it to activesupport. Regards, Pavel

On Sun, Sep 24, 2023 at 2:10 AM Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > On Sat, Sep 23, 2023 at 7:50 PM Mamoru TASAKA <mtasaka(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; > wrote: >> >> Hello, ruby-sig folks: >> >> From devel list: >> >> Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote on 2023/09/22 23:01: >>> On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 10:43:05AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233281#c3 >>>> >>>> This probably answers my question. So heads up to others. >>>> >>>> Dne 22. 09. 23 v 10:39 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): >>>>> Was this implemented in past days? I am asking because this FTBFS >>>>> suggest so: >>>>> >>>>> > https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/rubygem-timecop?collection=f40 >>> >>> Yes. The change was done in rawhide a while ago, but it got pushed to > F39 >>> only recently, see > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233281#c3. >>> >>> Zbyszek >> >> Now again I tried rebuilding all rubygem- packages, and >> now due to this tzdata removal changes, the following packages >> are now additionally FTBFS: >> >> rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml >> rubygem-globalid >> rubygem-haml >> rubygem-importmap-rails >> rubygem-jekyll >> rubygem-rails-controller-testing >> rubygem-sassc-rails >> rubygem-slim >> rubygem-sprockets-rails >> rubygem-timecop >> rubygem-web-console >> >> And all of these seems like: >> >> > /usr/share/gems/gems/tzinfo-2.0.6/lib/tzinfo/data_sources/zoneinfo_data_source.rb:252:in > `initialize': None of the paths included in > TZInfo::DataSources::ZoneinfoDataSource.search_path are valid zoneinfo > directories. (TZInfo::DataSources::ZoneinfoDirectoryNotFound) >> from > /usr/share/gems/gems/tzinfo-2.0.6/lib/tzinfo/data_source.rb:157:in `new' >> from > /usr/share/gems/gems/tzinfo-2.0.6/lib/tzinfo/data_source.rb:157:in > `create_default_data_source' >> from > /usr/share/gems/gems/tzinfo-2.0.6/lib/tzinfo/data_source.rb:55:in `block in > get' >> from > /usr/share/gems/gems/tzinfo-2.0.6/lib/tzinfo/data_source.rb:54:in > `synchronize' >> from > /usr/share/gems/gems/tzinfo-2.0.6/lib/tzinfo/data_source.rb:54:in `get' >> from > /usr/share/gems/gems/activesupport-7.0.8/lib/active_support/railtie.rb:88:in > `block in <class:Railtie>' >> from > /usr/share/gems/gems/railties-7.0.8/lib/rails/initializable.rb:32:in > `instance_exec' >> from > /usr/share/gems/gems/railties-7.0.8/lib/rails/initializable.rb:32:in `run' >> from > /usr/share/gems/gems/railties-7.0.8/lib/rails/initializable.rb:61:in `block > in run_initializers' >> from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:231:in `block in tsort_each' >> from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:353:in `block (2 levels) in > each_strongly_connected_component' >> from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:434:in > `each_strongly_connected_component_from' >> from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:352:in `block in > each_strongly_connected_component' >> from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:350:in `each' >> from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:350:in `call' >> from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:350:in > `each_strongly_connected_component' >> from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:229:in `tsort_each' >> from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:208:in `tsort_each' >> from > /usr/share/gems/gems/railties-7.0.8/lib/rails/initializable.rb:60:in > `run_initializers' >> from > /usr/share/gems/gems/railties-7.0.8/lib/rails/application.rb:372:in > `initialize!' >> ..... >> >> So initializer of rails tries to initialize tzdata, and if it is not > found exception is raised: >> The related code is: >> > https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/fc734f28e65ef8829a1a939ee6702c1f349a1... >> >> So what is the proper fix for this? >> >> A. Make every package above have "BuildRequires: tzdata" >> B. Make rubygem-tzinfo or rubygem-activesupport have "Requires (not > Recommends) tzdata" >> C. Or ask rubygem-activesupport upstream to make the code work even if > tzdata is absent >> >> My current thought is that as currently RoR code explicitly requests to > have tzdata installed, >> B. is the best option. >> > > I agree that Option B is the best option. > > > > -- > 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! > _______________________________________________ > ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-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.fedoraprojec... > Do not reply to spam, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue > _______________________________________________ ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-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.fedoraprojec... Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

I don't agree with B. Users are free to install tzinfo-data gem instead, which might or might not give them more freedom. Option B is quick and dirty and with that, we have not really moved anywhere. So I am for A short term and long term we can explore why AS tries to require tzdata.

Vít Dne 25. 09. 23 v 0:35 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): > Pavel Valena wrote on 2023/09/24 23:53: >> I agree. I was just thinking of adding it to activesupport. >> >> Regards, >> Pavel > > Okay, thank you! I see that this rubygem-activesupport change (to have > Requires: tzdata) cleared out the most of FTBFS I listed below. > > Looking closely, it is found that > > * rubygem-jekyll > > itself tries to use tzinfo directly. I will going to add > "BuildRequires (not Requires): tzdata" to jekyll (as it seems it is > not always required). > > Mamoru > >> >> On Sun, Sep 24, 2023 at 2:10 AM Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >> >>> On Sat, Sep 23, 2023 at 7:50 PM Mamoru TASAKA >>> <mtasaka(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hello, ruby-sig folks: >>>> >>>>   From devel list: >>>> >>>> Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote on 2023/09/22 23:01: >>>>> On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 10:43:05AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >>>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233281#c3 >>>>>> >>>>>> This probably answers my question. So heads up to others. >>>>>> >>>>>> Dne 22. 09. 23 v 10:39 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): >>>>>>> Was this implemented in past days? I am asking because this FTBFS >>>>>>> suggest so: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/rubygem-timecop?collection=f40 >>> >>>>> >>>>> Yes. The change was done in rawhide a while ago, but it got >>>>> pushed to >>> F39 >>>>> only recently, see >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2233281#c3. >>>>> >>>>> Zbyszek >>>> >>>> Now again I tried rebuilding all rubygem- packages, and >>>> now due to this tzdata removal changes, the following packages >>>> are now additionally FTBFS: >>>> >>>> rubygem-activemodel-serializers-xml >>>> rubygem-globalid >>>> rubygem-haml >>>> rubygem-importmap-rails >>>> rubygem-jekyll >>>> rubygem-rails-controller-testing >>>> rubygem-sassc-rails >>>> rubygem-slim >>>> rubygem-sprockets-rails >>>> rubygem-timecop >>>> rubygem-web-console >>>> >>>> And all of these seems like: >>>> >>>> >>> /usr/share/gems/gems/tzinfo-2.0.6/lib/tzinfo/data_sources/zoneinfo_data_source.rb:252:in >>> >>> `initialize': None of the paths included in >>> TZInfo::DataSources::ZoneinfoDataSource.search_path are valid zoneinfo >>> directories. (TZInfo::DataSources::ZoneinfoDirectoryNotFound) >>>>          from >>> /usr/share/gems/gems/tzinfo-2.0.6/lib/tzinfo/data_source.rb:157:in >>> `new' >>>>          from >>> /usr/share/gems/gems/tzinfo-2.0.6/lib/tzinfo/data_source.rb:157:in >>> `create_default_data_source' >>>>          from >>> /usr/share/gems/gems/tzinfo-2.0.6/lib/tzinfo/data_source.rb:55:in >>> `block in >>> get' >>>>          from >>> /usr/share/gems/gems/tzinfo-2.0.6/lib/tzinfo/data_source.rb:54:in >>> `synchronize' >>>>          from >>> /usr/share/gems/gems/tzinfo-2.0.6/lib/tzinfo/data_source.rb:54:in >>> `get' >>>>          from >>> /usr/share/gems/gems/activesupport-7.0.8/lib/active_support/railtie.rb:88:in >>> >>> `block in <class:Railtie>' >>>>          from >>> /usr/share/gems/gems/railties-7.0.8/lib/rails/initializable.rb:32:in >>> `instance_exec' >>>>          from >>> /usr/share/gems/gems/railties-7.0.8/lib/rails/initializable.rb:32:in >>> `run' >>>>          from >>> /usr/share/gems/gems/railties-7.0.8/lib/rails/initializable.rb:61:in >>> `block >>> in run_initializers' >>>>          from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:231:in `block in tsort_each' >>>>          from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:353:in `block (2 levels) in >>> each_strongly_connected_component' >>>>          from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:434:in >>> `each_strongly_connected_component_from' >>>>          from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:352:in `block in >>> each_strongly_connected_component' >>>>          from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:350:in `each' >>>>          from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:350:in `call' >>>>          from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:350:in >>> `each_strongly_connected_component' >>>>          from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:229:in `tsort_each' >>>>          from /usr/share/ruby/tsort.rb:208:in `tsort_each' >>>>          from >>> /usr/share/gems/gems/railties-7.0.8/lib/rails/initializable.rb:60:in >>> `run_initializers' >>>>          from >>> /usr/share/gems/gems/railties-7.0.8/lib/rails/application.rb:372:in >>> `initialize!' >>>> ..... >>>> >>>> So initializer of rails tries to initialize tzdata, and if it is not >>> found exception is raised: >>>> The related code is: >>>> >>> https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/fc734f28e65ef8829a1a939ee6702c1f349a1... >>> >>>> >>>> So what is the proper fix for this? >>>> >>>> A. Make every package above have "BuildRequires: tzdata" >>>> B. Make rubygem-tzinfo or rubygem-activesupport have "Requires (not >>> Recommends) tzdata" >>>> C. Or ask rubygem-activesupport upstream to make the code work >>>> even if >>> tzdata is absent >>>> >>>> My current thought is that as currently RoR code explicitly >>>> requests to >>> have tzdata installed, >>>> B. is the best option. >>>> >>> >>> I agree that Option B is the best option. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >>> To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-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.fedoraprojec... >>> >>> Do not reply to spam, report it: >>> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-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.fedoraprojec... >> Do not reply to spam, report it: >> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue > _______________________________________________ > ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-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.fedoraprojec... > Do not reply to spam, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue