https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007995
Michel Alexandre Salim <michel(a)michel-slm.name> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC| |michel(a)michel-slm.name
Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |michel(a)michel-slm.name
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |
Flags| |fedora-review?
| |needinfo?(jan(a)baudisch.xyz)
--- Comment #1 from Michel Alexandre Salim <michel(a)michel-slm.name> ---
Taking this review (removing the blocker on FE-NEEDSPONSOR since you're
sponsored now!)
One change request: so the %bcond_without you see at the top of the spec as
generated by rust2rpm actually controls whether that flag is enabled or not,
see
https://rpm-software-management.github.io/rpm/manual/conditionalbuilds.html
so:
%bcond_without check means %{with check} by default, unless compiled --without
check
If the Rust compiler we have is too old for the test suite, then you just flip
that definition to be %bcond_with check, and put a comment above it, no need to
comment out the entire %check section
This makes it easy to test locally if you think checks can be enabled again:
fedpkg srpm (or rpmbuild -bs rust-yansi.spec)
mock /path/to/rust-yansi-*.src.rpm --with check
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841
[Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a
sponsor
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2007995