Reported here ^^ for the beginning.
Vít
Dne 22. 11. 21 v 23:05 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
And I see immediately one problematic package in Koschei:
https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/package/rubygem-net-ssh
Not a surprise :/
Vít
Dne 22. 11. 21 v 23:01 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
>
> I have merged the
>
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ruby/pull-request/103 and build
> Ruby to fix the FTBFS. The upstream PR is not finalized yet, so I
> expect some changes in the future. I also apologize in advance should
> there be any unforeseen compatibility issue.
>
>
> Vít
>
>
>
> Dne 11. 11. 21 v 9:57 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
>>
>> There seems to be one legitimate issue with Puma:
>>
>>
https://github.com/ruby/openssl/pull/399#issuecomment-966103794
>>
>>
>> Vít
>>
>>
>> Dne 08. 11. 21 v 10:53 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
>>>
>>> Thx for checking. It seems both Eventmachine as well as Puma fails.
>>> Neither of the failures looks related to OpenSSL, though.
>>>
>>> Puma is broken by RPM. I have pushed the fix:
>>>
>>>
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rubygem-puma/c/29a98a559d6f96e47e7aefc...
>>>
>>>
>>> Vít
>>>
>>>
>>> Dne 08. 11. 21 v 2:46 Pavel Valena napsal(a):
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 9:14 PM Vít Ondruch <vondruch(a)redhat.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>>
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ruby/pull-request/103
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>> it looks good.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This ^^ is first draft of Ruby which should be compatible with
>>>> OpenSSL
>>>> 3.x. So far, I was just successful to build the package including
>>>> passing the test suite. Nevertheless:
>>>>
>>>> * Some test cases are disabled, because they fail even upstream
>>>>
>>>> * Upstream is not done with the patch set, so there will be
>>>> eventually
>>>> changes. But I'd like to fix the FTBFS ASAP.
>>>>
>>>> * The patches needs to be renamed and described and what not.
>>>>
>>>> * There are certainly quite a few deprecation warnings during
>>>> build, but
>>>> I'm not going to fix them. Preferring smaller patch set +
better
>>>> backward compatibility over them
>>>>
>>>> * I have not tested anything else, not even if it installs and
>>>> if e.g.
>>>> some gem can be installed.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It seems to work ok. I've also succeeded creating and running a
>>>> new Rails app (using Rails from Fedora).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> * It would deserve test mass rebuild, or at least mass rebuild of
>>>> packages which are currently FTBFS, such as Puma and possibly
>>>> event machine.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There is probably lot more what is wrong with the PR, so
>>>> please don't
>>>> merge it yet, but feel free to give it try. I just wanted to
>>>> share my
>>>> progress and save the work :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To test, I've built it in my testing COPR:
>>>>
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/pvalena/ruby-testing/build/2934888/
>>>>
>>>> I've also run gems rebuilds of dependent packages in an
>>>> accompanying COPR:
>>>>
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/pvalena/rubygems-testing/builds/
>>>> (starting with 2934971)
>>>>
>>>> There're multiple buildroots, so to if the build failed, you need
>>>> to be check for rawhide buildroot specifically(I'll fix this next
>>>> time). I'll check for any errors with my automation.
>>>>
>>>> Pavel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Vít
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> ruby-sig mailing list --ruby-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>>>> To unsubscribe send an email toruby-sig-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>>>> Fedora Code of
Conduct:https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
>>>> List
Guidelines:https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>>>> List
Archives:https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ruby-sig@lists.fed...
>>>> Do not reply to spam on the list, report
it:https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure