glib2 2.77.0 writes keyfiles (mostly used for config files) in a different way compared to 2.76.4. Typically, the actual content (groups, keys, values) remains the same but the formatting changes: - group comments may get placed differently (before keys of the previous group) - empty lines which used to separate group comments from the preceding keys visually are omitted - comments may not get written at all (if they are set for a group which does not "exist" yet, where "existence" can only be forced by setting a key and removing it). Some of these are not completely new or even considered bugfixes rather than regressions by upstream. Some of these will get reverted in 2.77.1 but (as per the current state) not all of them. This creates two possible problems: - Readibility of config files (for humans) can suffer - Automatic testing fails if other packages if their written config is compared literally Until glib2 comes out with a version which produces (literally) the same keyfiles as 2.76 (which may very well never happen at all) this bug can serve as a tracker for affected packages (the F39 mass rebuild produces FTBFS) and as a place for pointing at solutions. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Build a package which uses GKeyFile against 2.7.0 2. Compare written files before and after Actual Results: Differently formatted key files Expected Results: Unchanged key files https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/glib/-/merge_requests/3498 and similar Failed F39 build (failing test shows the problem): https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/notmuch.git#a5eafe0721a437deaa9f734dcff5232c87600add https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=103636455
Thanks - let me go ahead and backport the upstream fix.
FEDORA-2023-cd301afed7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-cd301afed7
FEDORA-2023-cd301afed7 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
Thanks for the backport. As indicated (maybe not clearly enough), the upstream commit fixes things partly only: it restores the position of group comments to be right before the group header again. It does not restore keyfiles formatting completely. In particular: - A file comment (before the first group/key) is not written any more - maybe it has to be forced now like the group headers (write value, remove value to "cretae" a group, then write comment), instead of just written? - Group comments are not lead by an empty line. I'll attach a diff from notmuch's test suite below. It is from today's build attempt (now that emacs good in the rawhide chroot again). So, glib upstream needs to do more fixing, or useres of glib's keyfile need to adjust. Not writing a file header comment is kind of bad though. Empty lines are to be dealt with probably. Just let me know whether you prefer individual bugs for individual facets. It's all keyfile/2.77.0 regression. https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/mjg/notmuch/build/6219308/ T040-setup: Testing "notmuch setup" PASS Notmuch new without a config suggests notmuch setup FAIL Create a new config interactively --- T040-setup.2.config-with-comments 2023-07-28 07:37:33.765432327 +0000 +++ T040-setup.2.new-notmuch-config 2023-07-28 07:37:33.766432283 +0000 @@ -1,7 +1,3 @@ -# .notmuch-config - Configuration file for the notmuch mail system -# -# For more information about notmuch, see https://notmuchmail.org - # Database configuration # # The only value supported here is 'path' which should be the top-level @@ -12,7 +8,6 @@ # [database] path=/path/to/maildir - # User configuration # # Here is where you can let notmuch know how you would like to be @@ -32,7 +27,6 @@ name=Test Suite primary_email=test.suite other_email=another.suite - # Configuration for "notmuch new" # # The following options are supported here: @@ -49,7 +43,6 @@ # [new] tags=foo;bar; - # Search configuration # # The following option is supported here: @@ -61,7 +54,6 @@ # [search] exclude_tags=baz - # Maildir compatibility configuration # # The following option is supported here:
Ah, bummer. In, any case, thanks for testing the change! Could you please file this upstream as a new issue against glib? That would help make sure the relevant people know about this. https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/glib/-/issues
FYI: I patch the test in notmuch to fix the FTBFS now, but I'll try to submit reproducers upstream (missing file comment, missing newlines in keyfiles).
Excellent, thanks!
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora Linux 39 development cycle. Changing version to 39.
See also https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2237562; something backported into F38 glib2 2.76.5 but not present in 2.76.1 changed how glib handles the character sequence \. (older glib treats it as 2 characters; newer glib rejects it as an unknown escape sequence), when compared to the intended sequence \\. that unambiguously represents 2 characters.
FEDORA-2023-c4dffa043e has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-c4dffa043e
FEDORA-2023-2189c44ddc has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-2189c44ddc
FEDORA-2023-2189c44ddc has been pushed to the Fedora 38 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-2189c44ddc` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-2189c44ddc See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2023-c4dffa043e has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-c4dffa043e` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-c4dffa043e See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2023-2189c44ddc has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2023-92fe74aaf6 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-92fe74aaf6` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-92fe74aaf6 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2023-92fe74aaf6 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.