rubygem-formatador failed to build from source in Fedora rawhide/f42 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=128106498 For details on the mass rebuild see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_42_Mass_Rebuild Please fix rubygem-formatador at your earliest convenience and set the bug's status to ASSIGNED when you start fixing it. If the bug remains in NEW state for 8 weeks, rubygem-formatador will be orphaned. Before branching of Fedora 43, rubygem-formatador will be retired, if it still fails to build. For more details on the FTBFS policy, please visit: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Fails_to_build_from_source_Fails_to_install/
Created attachment 2072423 [details] build.log
Created attachment 2072424 [details] root.log file root.log too big, will only attach last 32768 bytes
Created attachment 2072425 [details] state.log
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora Linux 42 development cycle. Changing version to 42.
Hey Vit, I've noticed that this package hasn't been updated for a while and the last successful build was in a Fedora 41 environment. Do you have plans to updated it to a newer version (on rawhide at least) and fix the FTBFS? Let me know if you need help (e.g. as a co-maintainer or through PRs). Thanks, David
Hi David, There is pending PR: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rubygem-formatador/pull-request/1 And it is pending due to: https://github.com/geemus/formatador/issues/56 Which is quite annoying problem :( I am open to any opinions how to proceed.
Hi and thanks for the quick reply! I've commented on that Github issue, hopefully that can be fixed for all kinds of emojis and glyphs of any language. In the meantime I think we can load the `unicode` gem (it is already packaged and available in Fedora) to update formatador and keep the Guards tests in order. Either formatador or Guard would need to add a requirement on rubygem-unicode (runtime and for tests we'd also need build-time) and then a small patch to add a "require 'unicode'" wherever formatador is used should do the trick. I'd say the patch should be added in Guard but both would be fine with me. (I don't know if there are other packages relying on one or the other behaviour by formatador. Considering the little reactions in their issue tracker it's probably only Guard.) Let me know what you think about this and if you want me to help with any part of it.
Thanks for reviving the upstream discussion. It seems there are some interesting proposals to move forward with this. In the mean time, I have also added you as a co-maintainer. BTW, one thing to also consider is removal of Guard from Fedora (although it would be sticking head into sand). @Jarek WDYT? Do you have any use for rubygem-guard-{livereload,shell}?
Hey, the upstream maintainer was very responsive and helpful, there is now the 1.2.0 release which should fix this issue (I think we managed to find a very good solution working together there). Could you check if that works for Fedora and the guard test suite? (I'm not a Ruby developer and for the moment it feels more efficient if you could take this and I'll look after some more python issues in the meantime. Thanks for making co-maintainer, that is still useful because I have the package on my packager dashboard and I'll be able to push a fix if it ever will be necessary.) Regarding removing Guards: I'm not using it but removing it just for the failed test shouldn't be necessary, we can always disable the problematic test(s) and keep the package.
PR: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rubygem-formatador/pull-request/2
(In reply to David Auer from comment #9) > Hey, the upstream maintainer was very responsive and helpful, there is now > the 1.2.0 release which should fix this issue (I think we managed to find a > very good solution working together there). Nice work 👏 > Could you check if that works > for Fedora and the guard test suite? It does work 👍 > Regarding removing Guards: I'm not using it but removing it just for the > failed test shouldn't be necessary, we can always disable the problematic > test(s) and keep the package. The package used to be more useful then it is now. But lets leave that for another day. BTW going to fix F43+. Will leave this one up to you 😇
Thanks a lot! > BTW going to fix F43+. Will leave this one up to you 😇 After sleeping on it I think I'll also rather leave that be. It's not worth the risk of breaking anything on a stable release after all. Closing this as wontfix for F42.
The needinfo request[s] on this closed bug have been removed as they have been unresolved for 120 days