Bug 1862950

 - Please add a comment explaining what you have changed to the Cargo.toml and add a link to a upstream PR

# Initial patched metadata
# Bump zbus_macros to 1.0.1
Patch0:         zbus-fix-metadata.diff


 - Bump to 1.1.1

 - Please install the LICENSE in the devel subpackage:

%files          devel
%license LICENSE
%{cargo_registry}/%{crate}-%{version_no_tilde}/

 - Several tests are failing:

running 11 tests
test address::tests::parse_dbus_addresses ... ok
test guid::tests::generate ... ok
test fdo::tests::error_from_zerror ... ok
test message_header::tests::header ... ok
test message::tests::test ... ok
test object_server::tests::basic_iface ... FAILED
test tests::fdpass_systemd ... FAILED
test tests::basic_connection ... FAILED
test tests::msg ... ok
test tests::freedesktop_api ... FAILED
test connection::tests::unix_p2p ... ok
failures:
---- object_server::tests::basic_iface stdout ----
Error: Io(Os { code: 2, kind: NotFound, message: "No such file or directory" })
thread 'object_server::tests::basic_iface' panicked at 'assertion failed: `(left == right)`
  left: `1`,
 right: `0`: the test returned a termination value with a non-zero status code (1) which indicates a failure', /builddir/build/BUILD/rustc-1.45.2-src/src/libstd/macros.rs:16:9
note: run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` environment variable to display a backtrace
---- tests::fdpass_systemd stdout ----
thread 'tests::fdpass_systemd' panicked at 'called `Result::unwrap()` on an `Err` value: Io(Os { code: 2, kind: NotFound, message: "No such file or directory" })', src/lib.rs:232:26
---- tests::basic_connection stdout ----
error: I/O error: No such file or directory (os error 2)
thread 'tests::basic_connection' panicked at 'called `Result::unwrap()` on an `Err` value: Io(Os { code: 2, kind: NotFound, message: "No such file or directory" })', src/lib.rs:208:26
---- tests::freedesktop_api stdout ----
error: I/O error: No such file or directory (os error 2)
thread 'tests::freedesktop_api' panicked at 'called `Result::unwrap()` on an `Err` value: Io(Os { code: 2, kind: NotFound, message: "No such file or directory" })', src/lib.rs:258:30
failures:
    object_server::tests::basic_iface
    tests::basic_connection
    tests::fdpass_systemd
    tests::freedesktop_api
test result: FAILED. 7 passed; 4 failed; 0 ignored; 0 measured; 0 filtered out

(In reply to Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 from comment #1)
>  - Please add a comment explaining what you have changed to the Cargo.toml
> and add a link to a upstream PR
> 
> # Initial patched metadata
> # Bump zbus_macros to 1.0.1
> Patch0:         zbus-fix-metadata.diff
> 
> 
>  - Bump to 1.1.1
> 
>  - Please install the LICENSE in the devel subpackage:
> 
> %files          devel
> %license LICENSE
> %{cargo_registry}/%{crate}-%{version_no_tilde}/
> 

ok

>  - Several tests are failing:
> 

How did you run the tests? I build under toolbox these days, simply with rpmbuild -ba.

(In reply to Marc-Andre Lureau from comment #2)
> (In reply to Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 from comment #1)
> >  - Please add a comment explaining what you have changed to the Cargo.toml
> > and add a link to a upstream PR
> > 
> > # Initial patched metadata
> > # Bump zbus_macros to 1.0.1
> > Patch0:         zbus-fix-metadata.diff
> > 
> > 
> >  - Bump to 1.1.1
> > 
> >  - Please install the LICENSE in the devel subpackage:
> > 
> > %files          devel
> > %license LICENSE
> > %{cargo_registry}/%{crate}-%{version_no_tilde}/
> > 
> 
> ok
> 
> >  - Several tests are failing:
> > 
> 
> How did you run the tests? I build under toolbox these days, simply with
> rpmbuild -ba.

They run within the Mock instance started by Fedora Review, I never use rpmbuild -ba.

I have worked on packaging zbus 1.7.0 (which included submitting 11 new dependencies for review as well ...).
Is it OK if I close this 4-month-stalled review request in favor of a new one for zbus 1.7.0?

(In reply to Fabio Valentini from comment #4)
> I have worked on packaging zbus 1.7.0 (which included submitting 11 new
> dependencies for review as well ...).
> Is it OK if I close this 4-month-stalled review request in favor of a new
> one for zbus 1.7.0?

it's ok to me, but you could simply reuse this bz as well.

Thank you.

Reusing the BZ won't work though, since at package creation time the bug submitter is checked to be the same as the user who requests the package.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1913487 ***