[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 Pavel Valena changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||rubygem-bootsnap-1.3.0-1.fc ||29 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2018-06-15 12:19:59 -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/7UNODUJ5Z4TR57IZXIJMSEWT5HEL6ME6/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 --- Comment #22 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rubygem-bootsnap -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/7GMSIDSIQKRGXVJ2RPTMXDYBHSSX327X/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 --- Comment #21 from Pavel Valena --- Correction - the commits most probably containing the fix are: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/58a2084483ce8baaf90d7b1cb00e3fa9570fbc79 https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/b6185e175cfac5bb8b56483c1b03997923af634e But there seems to be no easy way to backport it (needs other commits / changes). Therefore I'll build the bootsnap gem as is. Thanks for the review! -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/F2NJGF3DLH2OKZEPQIYG2BPFYSTPV7SS/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 Jun Aruga changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #20 from Jun Aruga --- @Pavel, Thank you for that. I will accept the review for current spec file. It's up to you to fix the ARM issue now or later. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/PK37RUWPV7QY2GFOGSARNCJUACNORQYE/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 --- Comment #19 from Pavel Valena --- I've added comments with links to issues above. I was also able to isolate and backport a possible fix for the ARM issue: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/c2007e191b2220619e524a8168411de7fdd2cae9 (Ruby build - https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=27586882) Now I'll try to test it further. Scratch-build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=27577493 -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/4FFDIHQXQ4QRMNVFN4FCID4AJPXUOAZR/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 --- Comment #18 from Jun Aruga --- > But the risk is rather low IMO, therefore I think it would be nice to raise > this concern upstream, have link to the upstream issue somewhere in the .spec > file and move on. Ah coincidence. Below is the link. > Anyway, I asked the upstream project by myself. > https://github.com/Shopify/bootsnap/issues/174 -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/PZU354XFOLTIYUPJGW76OAO7ALYRFR2B/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 --- Comment #17 from Jun Aruga --- Hi Pavel, I do not order you anything. I just reviewed your code following the review process. And I was not sure the rpmlint's result of ERROR was affordable or not. And if I was not confident for that, I can not accept your review. Anyway, I asked the upstream project by myself. https://github.com/Shopify/bootsnap/issues/174 I want to ask you to add the link somewhere in the spec file for the future. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/WFAQTNQ4HSRUSF6R6BECJHOXX6POWUIL/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 --- Comment #16 from Vít Ondruch --- (In reply to Pavel Valena from comment #12) > (In reply to Jun Aruga from comment #10) > > How about using mkstemp instead of mktemp? Though I am not confident for > > that? or asking security guys? > > > > https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Insecure_Temporary_File > > > Finally, mkstemp() is a reasonably safe way to create temporary files. > > In case you consider the implementation insecure, I think it's imperative to > contact upstream and solve the issue with them. Fedora is no such place and > in the end this needs to be resolved upstream anyway. If the mktemp is implemented as is described in the man(3) mktemp and the rails application is running in multiple processes, there can happen race condition IMO. In theory, this could be also exploited by TOCTOU. But the risk is rather low IMO, therefore I think it would be nice to raise this concern upstream, have link to the upstream issue somewhere in the .spec file and move on. If this was be real concern, then every user of bootstrap would be vulnerable and upstream needs to fix it anyway. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/X5LDE3JVDDK7WUP7EY3V6VIMX6TQTY4W/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 --- Comment #15 from Pavel Valena --- (In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #14) > (In reply to Pavel Valena from comment #7) > > > I am fine to skip the test failure this time for armv7hl. > > > > I'll file a bug when the component is created. > > In the meantime I'll exclude the armv7hl arch, as it does not work at all. > > https://github.com/Shopify/bootsnap/issues/67 > https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/13670 > > Could you please check if there is fix in trunk or not? Sure, thanks. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/54WEHCPRUFBDHUTWPRDXQZD4IQFQ7FP2/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 --- Comment #14 from Vít Ondruch --- (In reply to Pavel Valena from comment #7) > > I am fine to skip the test failure this time for armv7hl. > > I'll file a bug when the component is created. > In the meantime I'll exclude the armv7hl arch, as it does not work at all. https://github.com/Shopify/bootsnap/issues/67 https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/13670 Could you please check if there is fix in trunk or not? -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/MESOBV6WWU2JGGOTLGBVXS2I6FHGATPV/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 --- Comment #13 from Pavel Valena --- Note: `bootsnap/setup` gets called only once, on the 'boot' in Rails. https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/5-2-stable/railties/lib/rails/generators/rails/app/templates/config/boot.rb.tt -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/RHJXZ3QFFSLORP6ZIOCTYMSSVMZGY74N/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295
--- Comment #12 from Pavel Valena ---
(In reply to Jun Aruga from comment #10)
> How about using mkstemp instead of mktemp? Though I am not confident for
> that? or asking security guys?
>
> https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Insecure_Temporary_File
> > Finally, mkstemp() is a reasonably safe way to create temporary files.
In case you consider the implementation insecure, I think it's imperative to
contact upstream and solve the issue with them. Fedora is no such place and in
the end this needs to be resolved upstream anyway.
> Are you sure?
> It seems that the method "atomic_write_cache_file" which mktemp is called in
> is expecting as a attomic.
> But seeing the actual logic, I think the logic [2] is not related to the
> called method atomic_write_cache_file. As you know, Mutex itself is used for
> native thread. But it does not guarantee atomic access if lock is not used.
> It depends on the implementation.
Yes, like I wrote the mutex is used on Ruby level, not on C level. Whether
that's secure or not is not for me to decide. However, there are two more
conditions that'd have to be met for this to be a successfull attack, like I
wrote already:
> Furthermore, reading CAPEC[3], as suggested by rpmlint, none of the Attack
> Prerequisites are not met AFAICT.
> [3] http://capec.mitre.org/data/definitions/29.html
> For example it seems that when below logic is called several times at same
> timing, it does not guarantee the atomic access.
>
> ```
> irb(main):001:0> require 'bootsnap'
> irb(main):006:0> Bootsnap.setup(cache_dir: '/tmp/foo', autoload_paths_cache:
> false)
> => :load_file
> ```
Disregarding the attack vector, for the sake of the argument -
Actually, I think it should be safe. Because when you use native Ruby Threads
(like in a rails app), Bootsnap runs `@mutex.synchronize { ... }` everywhere[*]
and the requests should not collide.
[*]
https://github.com/Shopify/bootsnap/blob/684acfd9b8c1298a026dd6b9c2ffeb173d11e949/lib/bootsnap/load_path_cache/cache.rb#L11
--
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/UWSFG3VO2HO6MQ6EQMXQS2MGQT2OHGJ6/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 --- Comment #11 from Jun Aruga --- > I'll file a bug when the component is created. > In the meantime I'll exclude the armv7hl arch, as it does not work at all. Okay. It is good to file the bug as Bugzilla. > ExcludeArch: armv7hl Okay, this looks better. Other things look good to me. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/QSN64QMXAGRIVPPM6P2Y4DBTAVD4DFFF/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 --- Comment #10 from Jun Aruga --- How about using mkstemp instead of mktemp? Though I am not confident for that? or asking security guys? https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Insecure_Temporary_File > Finally, mkstemp() is a reasonably safe way to create temporary files. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/UFXOJ7FOHAGXYP5TVUR5MGGHOZUWGGOL/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 --- Comment #9 from Jun Aruga --- Ref: How to attack is written here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_of_check_to_time_of_use -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/6KTFNOOBEGJA23VB6RVFWXPVRBPWCCMX/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 --- Comment #8 from Jun Aruga --- > I do not think wee need to do anything with the `call-to-mktemp` - see below. > > Reading the code: > * On C level [1] - expects atomic access to a file (used for caching only, > reasonable hashing method is used); and > * On Ruby level [2] - Mutex is used for synchronizing the Threads Are you sure? It seems that the method "atomic_write_cache_file" which mktemp is called in is expecting as a attomic. But seeing the actual logic, I think the logic [2] is not related to the called method atomic_write_cache_file. As you know, Mutex itself is used for native thread. But it does not guarantee atomic access if lock is not used. It depends on the implementation. lib/bootsnap.rb Bootsnap::CompileCache.setup -> lib/bootsnap/compile_cache.rb Bootsnap::CompileCache.setup. -> lib/bootsnap/compile_cache/iseq.rb: Bootsnap::CompileCache::Native.fetch def self.install!(cache_dir) -> lib/bootsnap/compile_cache/yaml.rb: Bootsnap::CompileCache::Native.fetch def self.install!(cache_dir) -> ext/bootsnap/bootsnap.c rb_define_module_function(rb_mBootsnap_CompileCache_Native, "fetch", bs_rb_fetch, 3); bs_rb_fetch -> bs_fetch -> atomic_write_cache_file <= it looks atomic access from the method name. tmp_path = mktemp(template); For example it seems that when below logic is called several times at same timing, it does not guarantee the atomic access. ``` irb(main):001:0> require 'bootsnap' irb(main):006:0> Bootsnap.setup(cache_dir: '/tmp/foo', autoload_paths_cache: false) => :load_file ``` -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/3NDF7G4YLCST2LYUYIIJA3BGAG37L7MQ/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 --- Comment #7 from Pavel Valena --- > I am fine to skip the test failure this time for armv7hl. I'll file a bug when the component is created. In the meantime I'll exclude the armv7hl arch, as it does not work at all. > You can move CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md to %files doc? Sure, I somehow overlooked it... > Other things look okay! I do not think wee need to do anything with the `call-to-mktemp` - see below. Reading the code: * On C level [1] - expects atomic access to a file (used for caching only, reasonable hashing method is used); and * On Ruby level [2] - Mutex is used for synchronizing the Threads Furthermore, reading CAPEC[3], as suggested by rpmlint, none of the Attack Prerequisites are not met AFAICT. This gem is also heavily used and developed at Shopify (and now enabled by default in any Rails app). Concluding that any security concerns one might have have been very probably already investigated. [1] https://github.com/Shopify/bootsnap/blob/684acfd9b8c1298a026dd6b9c2ffeb173d11e949/ext/bootsnap/bootsnap.c#L466 [2] https://github.com/Shopify/bootsnap/blob/684acfd9b8c1298a026dd6b9c2ffeb173d11e949/lib/bootsnap/load_path_cache/cache.rb#L11 [3] http://capec.mitre.org/data/definitions/29.html Additionally, I've commented out any $CFLAGS modification in `extconf.rb` file to use the default Fedora ones. I've updated the links again, Scratch-build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=27490538 Thanks for the review! -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/E4GUMXFHL4SGC3MXAOBYVU2WUTJOJBTN/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 --- Comment #6 from Jun Aruga --- You can move CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md to %files doc? Other things look okay! -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/YM4LXO72SU4D7T2ZZDPYB6ENMAHDXXPF/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 --- Comment #5 from Jun Aruga --- You need source contribution to the upstream to change the logic, don't you? ``` $ rpmlint -i ./*.spec /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/result/*.rpm ... rubygem-bootsnap.x86_64: E: call-to-mktemp /usr/lib64/gems/ruby/bootsnap-1.3.0/bootsnap/bootsnap.so This executable calls mktemp. As advised by the manpage (mktemp(3)), this function should be avoided. Some implementations are deeply insecure, and there is a race condition between the time of check and time of use (TOCTOU). See http://capec.mitre.org/data/definitions/29.html for details, and contact upstream to have this issue fixed. ``` -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/GLS6AWKBO27YPSSGVASJ23QDVFK347OF/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 --- Comment #4 from Jun Aruga --- I am fine to skip the test failure this time for armv7hl. ``` %ifarch armv7hl ... ruby -Ilib:test:ext -e 'Dir.glob "./test/**/*_test.rb", (:require)' ... %endif ``` -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/5TTQZ3Q4CWE4TSICYCUEP7TK6H27A3ER/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 Pavel Valena changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vondr...@redhat.com --- Comment #3 from Pavel Valena --- (In reply to Jun Aruga from comment #1) > First of all, your unit test is actually executed for zero files. > As the test files (test/*) are not included in the gem file, you have to > prepare the archive file including those files. Hmm, strange, I thought I've checked and fixed this. (In reply to Jun Aruga from comment #2) > I guess as below files are used for development, those should be included in > %files doc > > ``` > bin/console > bin/setup > bin/testunit > ``` True. I've done the fixes and re-uploaded srpm and .spec file (links in Description). Scratch-builds (ARM si failing -reproducibly- for some reason): https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=27478103 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=27478502 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=27478541 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=27478650 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=27478585 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=27478676 -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/Z3OTM5JUWWKKVBFPYBSEC67LRLLRATLJ/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 --- Comment #2 from Jun Aruga --- I guess as below files are used for development, those should be included in %files doc ``` bin/console bin/setup bin/testunit ``` -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/E7MNF2K4FBRVJA3NAAM6FSIZ3DGQDPKQ/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 --- Comment #1 from Jun Aruga --- First of all, your unit test is actually executed for zero files. As the test files (test/*) are not included in the gem file, you have to prepare the archive file including those files. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/QZMSRJKLXV54RUFG3KCWWOAFU237NRAU/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 Jun Aruga changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jar...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jar...@redhat.com -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/TCP5D6KKO6FSG6QOSXIJLW5XO6HNSTY5/
[Bug 1586295] Review Request: rubygem-bootsnap - Boot large ruby/ rails apps faster
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1586295 Pavel Valena changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review? -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/4XOQI5GCBMIU2RADZVZYPNNJXE2FHEEO/
