Fedora 42 will update Tcl/Tk to version 9.0. It seems your package uses Tcl or Tk as a dependency. Please check that your package builds and works correctly with Tcl/Tk 9.0. The effort is tracked in the bug 2337584, there is system wide change proposal [1]. I also tried to rebuild the direct dependencies in Copr [2]. TL/DR: - there is side tag "f42-build-side-103615" - Tcl/Tk was bumped to version 9.0 in the side tag - there are compat packages tcl8/tk8 in the side tag for backward compatibility - if your package needs fixing, please fix it to build with the Tcl/Tk 9.0 or switch it to the compat tcl8/tk8 - build your package into the side tag "f42-build-side-103615" (if rebuild is not needed, e.g. the package just calls the Tcl shell and works with any Tcl version, ignore this step) - close this bug Full version: If your package works correctly and doesn't require rebuild, please close this bug as rawhide. If your package needs rebuild and correctly builds with the Tcl/Tk 9.0, please rebuild it with the side-tag "f42-build-side-103615": $ fedpkg build --target=f42-build-side-103615 Optionally, you can regenerate the repo for others to be able to build with your package in the side-tag (example YOUR_PKG_NVR="brltty-6.7-3"): $ koji wait-repo --build=$YOUR_PKG_NVR.fc42 f42-build-side-103615 --request Close this bug as rawhide. If your package doesn't build with the Tcl/Tk 9.0, please fix/port it. There is a Tcl/Tk 9.0 porting guide [3]. Then build it with the side-tag "f42-build-side-103615": $ fedpkg build --target=f42-build-side-103615 Optionally, you can regenerate the repo for others to be able to build with your package in the side-tag, (example YOUR_PKG_NVR="brltty-6.7-3"): $ koji wait-repo --build=$YOUR_PKG_NVR.fc42 f42-build-side-103615 --request Close this bug as rawhide. If your package cannot be ported or it's unrealistic to do it in the short time, please switch to the compat Tcl/Tk 8 packages. In the spec file change the BuildRequires from the "tcl-devel"/"tk-devel" to "tcl8-devel"/"tk8-devel". If your package needs explicit "Requires: tcl", you can use "Requires: tcl8". Then build your package with the side-tag "f42-build-side-103615": $ fedpkg build --target=f42-build-side-103615 Optionally, you can regenerate the repo for others to be able to build with your package in the side-tag, (example YOUR_PKG_NVR="brltty-6.7-3"): $ koji wait-repo --build=$YOUR_PKG_NVR.fc42 f42-build-side-103615 --request Close this bug as rawhide. If you update your package after resolving this bug (and before 2025-02-04), please build to the side-tag. Components which bugzillas won't be resolved till 2025-01-31 will be switched to the compat tcl8/tk8 packages by proven packager and rebuilt into the side-tag. Then at the turning point (2025-02-03) the side-tag will be pushed by me as an Bodhi update. Thanks for your cooperation. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/TclTk9.0 [2] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jskarvad/TclTK9.0.0/ [3] https://www.tcl-lang.org/software/tcltk/9.0.html
Update: There is a better way how to handle switch to compat packages, instead of build requiring tcl8-devel/tk8-devel, the following is better and backward compatible approach: BuildRequires: tcl-devel < 9 BuildRequires: tk-devel < 9 The correct provides are already included in the tcl8/tk8 packages. And in a such way the package needn't be built into the side tag. For updates please check the tracking bug 2337584.
Update (auto comment): > BuildRequires: tcl-devel < 9 > BuildRequires: tk-devel < 9 There is epoch, so the correct variant is: BuildRequires: tcl-devel < 1:9 BuildRequires: tk-devel < 1:9 Sorry for confusion.
Will the side tag rebuilds need to be done again after the mass rebuild?
(In reply to Paul Howarth from comment #3) > Will the side tag rebuilds need to be done again after the mass rebuild? Packages using compat tcl8/tk8 doesn't require side-tag rebuild, the ABI shouldn't break. Packages using tcl/tk 9 needs to be build into side-tag. I am going to bump & rebuild everything in the side-tag before I will push the bodhi update (I initially didn't count with the mass rebuild and gcc-15 stuff).
Built in side tag.