Re: Current FTBFS status for ruby4.0.0dev (2025-12-12)

Mon, 22 Dec 2025 03:29:09 -0800 


Dne 22. 12. 25 v 11:45 Mamoru TASAKA via ruby-sig napsal(a):

Vít Ondruch via ruby-sig wrote on 2025/12/22 18:58:


Dne 21. 12. 25 v 14:55 Mamoru TASAKA via ruby-sig napsal(a):

Mamoru TASAKA via ruby-sig wrote on 2025/12/20 22:24:

Mamoru TASAKA via ruby-sig wrote on 2025/12/16 0:01:

Hello, ruby-sig folks


Again I tried rebuilding rubygem-XXX packages with 4.0.0dev 
(2025-12-12 master 2f151e76b5) .
Currently (ignoring rubygem-jekyll related packages) 9 packages 
FTBFS, which is in better state

than before.



Then:


minitest 6.0.0 landed on ruby4.0.0dev 3 days ago (from 5.27.0), 
this now seems to cause new FTBFS for 47 packages.
rdoc 7.0.0 (then 7.0.1) launded 2 days ago (from 6.17.0), this now 
seems to cause new FTBFS for 6 packages.


Honestly I am at a loss...




Just checked randomly 4 packages and 3 failures were: `cannot load 
such file -- minitest/mock (LoadError)`, which seems to be due to:



https://github.com/minitest/minitest/commit/de9aac1d3f52224ae5d93a186d129c72d5ec979f 



So shouldn't we start with minitest-mock?



I see this error, but some other packages (including rubygem-nokogiri) 
see something like:



NoMethodError: undefined method 'stub' for an instance of 
Nokogiri::XML::Document
    test/xml/test_document.rb:502:in 
'test_inspect_object_with_no_data_ptr'



Speaking of Nokogiri, this is also minitest-mock IMO


1) Stub is related to mocking, isn't it? There also is `stub` method in 
minitest-mock:


https://github.com/minitest/minitest-mock/blob/main/lib/minitest/mock.rb#L288


2) There is another error in Nokogiri, which says: `NameError: 
uninitialized constant Minitest::Mock`, this again points to minitest-mock






minitest 5.27.0 warning seems to mention for this, however currently I 
don't know
how to fix this. And also I see some other errors which I have not 
categorized yet.



So I think it is better that we introduce minitest5 for now, then 
gradually

migrate packages depending on minitest5 to minitest6.




I am not against. But introducing minitest5 means to change all the 
currently failing packages. I'd rather had better understanding of the 
issues prior, because if we do so, we hide the problem.




Just FTR, updating rubygem-rubyzip right now, because there clearly is 
new version which fixes the issue. And I would not be surprised if 
missing `minitest/unit` is more common problem.



Vít




Regards,
Mamoru



Vít






For minitest, since many packages are not ready for minitest6, I 
submitted a review request for

minitest5:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2424184


I would appreciate it if someone would review this (review swap is 
welcomed).


Regards,
Mamoru







Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature.asc

Description: OpenPGP digital signature


-- 
_______________________________________________
ruby-sig mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
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/[email protected]
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue






















					Reply via email to