On 1/2/24 16:41, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 02. 01. 24 v 16:15 Pavel Valena napsal(a):
On Tue, Jan 2, 2024 at 3:38 PM Vít Ondruch <vondr...@redhat.com> wrote:
Hi everybody and happy new year,
Being back from holidays, here is Ruby 3.3.0.
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=111186668
As some of you have noticed, there are issues with expired
certificates.
I have asked backport here:
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20106
Other than that, there does not seem to be anything surprising.
As I have already mentioned elsewhere, I have reset the release
back to
1. I have not tested the updates yet, so I'm going to give it a
try. If
that looks OK, I'll ask the side tag and we can move forward with
the
mass rebuild. I'll keep you informed.
And as always, any feedback is appreciated.
Hello, thanks!
Already building it; for testing with `-1`. But so far I have failure
on aarch; FAIL 103/1871 tests failed
FAIL 103/1871 tests failed:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/pvalena/ruby-testing/build/6848059/
Seems like fibers and Ractors... will retry. Others have succeeded!
My build succeeded everywhere. Nevertheless, there were some reports
about issues with fibers (e.g.
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20085). So we should probably
observe and if needed, apply some patch.
I did a build from my EL9 specific specfile here:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jackorp/ruby-builds/build/6848355/
It failed with a bunch of segfaults as well, it seems the issue is
reproducible on copr infra. The number of failed tests is the same as
with Pavel's build (103/1871)
Actually, the hw_info differs for copr and koji. Koji is missing `paca
pacg` (I guess those are related to the mentioned
`ASFLAGS=-mbranch-protection=pac-ret`), though ssbs is present on both.
My copr build hw_info.log.gz:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/jackorp/ruby-builds/fedora-rawhide-aarch64/06848355-ruby/hw_info.log.gz
Passed koji build hw_info.log.gz:
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/6817/111186817/hw_info.log
Also despite both of the infra are reporting the same Vendor ID and
Model Name, there are visually half the CPU flags missing on Koji
compared to copr.
Jarek
Vít
I'm rebuilding the few remaining deps in my COPR repo. Hopefully,
I'll be able to test with Rails (dnf install ruby-on-rails....) soon.
Regards,
Pavel
Vít
--
_______________________________________________
ruby-sig mailing list --ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email toruby-sig-le...@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.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report
it:https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
--
_______________________________________________
ruby-sig mailing list --ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email toruby-sig-le...@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.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report
it:https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
--
_______________________________________________
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@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.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
