[DRE-maint] Bug#899324: ruby-font-awesome-rails: broken with fonts-font-awesome 5

Package: ruby-font-awesome-rails Version: 4.7.0.2-1 Severity: grave Justification: renders package unusable Recently fonts-font-awesome 5 has been uploaded to ustable. There are some significant changes upstream, including but not limited to font files being renamed. fonts-font-awesome 5.0.10-4

[DRE-maint] Bug#897279: Bug#897279: marked as done (libruby2.5: circular dependency hell)

Control: tag 897279 + wontfix On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 10:45:49AM +0200, Christian Hofstaedtler wrote: > Control: reopen 897279 > > > I have just uploaded fixed versions of rake and ruby-test-unit, therefore > > breaking the cycles. > > But now: > > % rake > zsh: /usr/bin/rake: bad interpreter:

[DRE-maint] Bug#893501: ruby2.5 FTCBFS: configures for the build architecture

Em 22 de julho de 2018 10:57:16 BRT, Chris Hofstaedtler escreveu: >Hi Helmut, > >* Helmut Grohne [180722 13:55]: >> ruby2.5 fails to cross build from source, because it fails passing >> --host to ./configure. The simple solution to this problem is >deferring >> the task to dh_auto_configure.

[DRE-maint] Bug#894749: #894749 - libgoogle-perftools4: missing libprofiler.so.0 on ppc64el (was "ruby-grpc: FTBFS on ppc64el: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory")

Control: reassign -1 libgoogle-perftools4 2.6.90-0.1 Control: retitle -1 libgoogle-perftools4: missing libprofiler.so.0 on ppc64el Control: affects -1 + ruby-grpc On Tue, 03 Apr 2018 22:50:29 +0200 Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > Source: ruby-grpc > Version: 1.3.2+debian-4 >

[DRE-maint] Bug#900161: ruby-openssl: FTBFS against openssl 1.1.1

On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 12:10:53PM +0100, peter green wrote: > i tried to modify the testsuite to use stronger keys (patch > attatched), however after doing so the testsuite now hangs (relavent > output pasted at end of message). Not sure what is going wrong here (I > am neither a ruby expert or

[DRE-maint] Bug#909205: FTBFS: 3 test failures

Source: chef Version: 13.8.7-2 Severity: serious Justification: fails to build from source This is the bottom of the build log: Finished in 1 minute 57.8 seconds (files took 6.76 seconds to load) 11422 examples, 3 failures, 24 pending Failed examples: rspec

[DRE-maint] Bug#918026: ruby-sinatra-contrib: uninstallable; depends on versions not present in the archive

On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 10:50:03AM +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote: > On Fri, 4 Jan 2019 10:22:08 -0300 > Antonio Terceiro wrote: > > Are you working on updating sinatra? I started working on a new sinatra > > upstream release to unbreak debci after a new rack was uploaded, a

[DRE-maint] Bug#914771: bundler: cannot load such file -- bundler-1.16.1/exe/bundle

On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 03:15:07PM +0800, Andrew Lee wrote: > Package: bundler > Version: 1.16.1-3 > Severity: normal > > Dear Maintainer, > > I'm preparing open-build-service 2.9 package for Debian. While that I > got to update some build-deps and noticed that there is an issue in > bundler

[DRE-maint] Bug#918026: ruby-sinatra-contrib: uninstallable; depends on versions not present in the archive

On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 10:58:15AM -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > Package: ruby-sinatra-contrib > Version: 2.0.5-1 > Severity: serious > Justification: unsatisfiable dependencies > > # apt install ruby-sinatra-contrib > Reading package lists... Done > Building depende

[DRE-maint] Bug#918026: ruby-sinatra-contrib: uninstallable; depends on versions not present in the archive

On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 10:22:08AM -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 10:58:15AM -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > > Package: ruby-sinatra-contrib > > Version: 2.0.5-1 > > Severity: serious > > Justification: unsatisfiable dependencies > >

[DRE-maint] Bug#918026: ruby-sinatra-contrib: uninstallable; depends on versions not present in the archive

Package: ruby-sinatra-contrib Version: 2.0.5-1 Severity: serious Justification: unsatisfiable dependencies # apt install ruby-sinatra-contrib Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have

[DRE-maint] Bug#908826: vagrant/stable is incompatible with virtualbox/stretch-backports (now 5.2)

On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 03:16:05PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > On 15/09/18 at 09:46 -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 05:10:48PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > > Package: vagrant > > > Version: 1.9.1+dfsg-1+deb9u1 > > &

[DRE-maint] Bug#903448: Bug#903448: ruby-websocket-parser, ruby-websocket: error when trying to install together

Control: reassign -1 ruby-websocket-parser Control: retitle -1 ruby-websocket-parser: hijacks namespace from ruby-websocket Control: found -1 1.0.0-1 On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:13:32AM +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > Package: ruby-websocket-parser,ruby-websocket > Severity: serious > User:

[DRE-maint] Bug#914771: Re: Bug#914771: bundler: cannot load such file -- bundler-1.16.1/exe/bundle

On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 07:10:55PM +0100, Daniel Leidert wrote: > Can we maybe change Gem.bin_path to fall back to /usr/bin or even $path? Not at this point in the release cycle. signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers

[DRE-maint] Bug#914771: bundler: cannot load such file -- bundler-1.16.1/exe/bundle

Hello, On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 02:06:29AM +0800, Andrew Lee wrote: > ┌──┐ > │ Run tests for ruby2.5 from debian/ruby-tests.rake > │ >

[DRE-maint] Bug#914771: Re: Bug#914771: bundler: cannot load such file -- bundler-1.16.1/exe/bundle

On Sat, Mar 09, 2019 at 01:43:30AM +0100, Daniel Leidert wrote: > Am Freitag, den 08.03.2019, 16:23 -0300 schrieb Antonio Terceiro: > > On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 07:10:55PM +0100, Daniel Leidert wrote: > > > Can we maybe change Gem.bin_path to fall back to /usr/bin o

[DRE-maint] Bug#921847: rails breaks ruby-combustion autopkgtest: cannot load such file -- active_model/secure_password

Control: reassign -1 ruby-combustion Control: found -1 1.0.0-1 Control: done -1 1.0.0-2 On Sat, Feb 09, 2019 at 01:13:41PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > Source: rails, ruby-combustion > Control: found -1 rails/2:5.2.2+dfsg-5 > Control: found -1 ruby-combustion/1.0.0-1 > X-Debbugs-CC:

[DRE-maint] Bug#702577: Would like to resolve this issue

On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 10:17:00PM +0530, Manas Kashyap wrote: > Hola , > I would like to work on this issue and get it resolved . I'm not sure we really want to do this. Bundler is now bundled together with Ruby 2.6 as a "default gem", so it does not make sense for us to expect upstream code to

[DRE-maint] Bug#928068: ruby2.5: FTBFS on ia64 due to segfault

On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 09:06:15AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > Hello Antonio! > > On 4/27/19 2:00 PM, James Clarke wrote: > > Currently, ruby2.5 FTBFS, segfaulting when building documentation. > > Please include the above patch applied[1] upstream (currently only to > > trunk) to

[DRE-maint] Bug#896904: New upstream available

Control: tag -1 + wontfix On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 04:55:06PM +0200, Inaki Malerba wrote: > Dear Maintainer, > > This issue is still present. I tested version 2.2.4 from upstream and > works fine. Any version that you test from upstream will work, because installing a vagrant plugin means

[DRE-maint] Bug#926278: Please build a separate binary package to ship rubygems

On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 10:09:07PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > Package: libruby2.5 > Version: 2.5.5-1 > Severity: wishlist > > rubygems are currently a part of libruby2.5. Can you please split them into a > separate binary package like ruby2.5-rubygems (which libruby2.5 would still >

[DRE-maint] Bug#944698: Help with updating triggers in gitlab

On Sat, Nov 16, 2019 at 06:26:58PM +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote: > Control: tag -1 help > > Hi team, > > See > > For example ruby-google-protobuf gets installed in > /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/rubygems-integration/2.5.0/specifications/

[DRE-maint] Bug#950962: FTBFS: "JSON blows up on circular references" test fails

Source: ruby-sentry-raven Version: 2.9.0-1 Severity: serious Tags: ftbfs bullseye sid Justification: fails to build from source Failures: 1) JSON blows up on circular references Failure/Error: expect { JSON.dump(data) }.to raise_error(SystemStackError) expected SystemStackError,

[DRE-maint] Bug#950963: FTBFS: Could not find gem 'sqlite3 (~> 1.3.8)' in any of the gem sources listed in your Gemfile

Source: ruby-joiner Version: 0.4.2-1 Severity: serious Tags: ftbfs Justification: fails to build from source ruby-sqlite3 was recently updated in unstable, and now ruby-joiner fails to build with: Could not find gem 'sqlite3 (~> 1.3.8)' in any of the gem sources listed in your Gemfile. Note

[DRE-maint] Bug#949824: schleuder: tests fail with ruby-sqlite 1.4.2-1

Source: schleuder Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Hi, I'm about upload ruby-sqlite3 1.4.2-1, and schleuder now fails its tests on the dependency resolution step. ┌──┐ │ Checking Rubygems dependency resolution on

[DRE-maint] Bug#951587: ruby-batch-loader: FTBFS against ruby2.7: cannot load such file -- irb/ruby-token

Source: ruby-batch-loader Version: 1.4.1+dfsg.1-1 Severity: serious Tags: ftbfs Justification: fails to build from source User pkg-ruby-extras-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: ruby2.7-transition LoadError: cannot load such file -- irb/ruby-token # /<>/spec/spec_helper.rb:12:in `' #

[DRE-maint] Bug#951430: gem2deb: missing debian/.gitattributes in produced packages

Package: gem2deb Version: 1.0 Tags: confirmed newcomer (bcc: submit@b.d.o to open a bug report) On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 07:16:14PM -0500, Utkarsh Gupta wrote: > Hi Georg, > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 7:10 PM Georg Faerber wrote: > > > JFTR: It is also missing debian/.gitattributes - probably

Re: [DRE-maint] ruby-train_3.2.20-1_amd64.changes is NEW

Hello FTP Masters, On Fri, Mar 06, 2020 at 09:49:58PM +, Debian FTP Masters wrote: > binary:ruby-train-core is NEW. > binary:ruby-train-core is NEW. > source:ruby-train is NEW. Could you please expedite the review of src:ruby-train and src:ruby-ffi-librachive? These are dependencies for a

Re: [DRE-maint] ruby-ruby2-keywords_0.0.2-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 09:00:09PM +, Thorsten Alteholz wrote: > > Hi Antonio, > > thanks for opening the issues upstream. Nevertheless the license requires to > add the license text and as it is not part of /usr/share/common-licenses, > please add the complete license text to your

[DRE-maint] Bug#958019: Please add option to specify the test file to run

On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 03:10:18PM +0200, Daniel Leidert wrote: > Package: gem2deb-test-runner > Version: 1.0.5+b1 > Severity: wishlist > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > The use case I have is ruby-rubocop-performance. It cannot run the tests > during build because

[DRE-maint] Bug#955583: ruby-defaults breaks ruby-mousetrap-rails autopkgtest: TypeError: no implicit conversion of String into Integer

Hi On Thu, Apr 02, 2020 at 09:38:26PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > Source: ruby-defaults, ruby-mousetrap-rails > Control: found -1 ruby-defaults/1:2.7 > Control: found -1 ruby-mousetrap-rails/1.4.6-6 > Severity: serious > Tags: sid bullseye > X-Debbugs-CC: debian...@lists.debian.org > User:

[DRE-maint] Bug#955583: ruby-defaults breaks ruby-mousetrap-rails autopkgtest: TypeError: no implicit conversion of String into Integer

On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 07:58:03PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > Hi Antonio, > > On 03-04-2020 15:38, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > >> Bundle complete! 19 Gemfile dependencies, 77 gems now installed. > >> Use `bundle info [gemname]` to see where a bundled gem is install

[DRE-maint] Bug#942596: Patch available by Fedora

On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 02:07:58PM +0200, Daniel Leidert wrote: > tags 942596 + patch > thanks > > Hi there, > > it seems Fedora people applied a patch to remove bundler usage from jekyll and > make --skip-bundle behavior the default. Shall we use it too? > >

[DRE-maint] Bug#959115: ruby-curses: Incorrect/misleading Maintainer: field

Source: ruby-curses Severity: normal This package says its maintained by the Debian Ruby team, but it's not in the team repositories. Maintainer: Debian Ruby Extras Maintainers Uploaders: Andrej Shadura [...] Vcs-Browser: https://browse.dgit.debian.org/ruby-curses.git/ Vcs-Git:

[DRE-maint] Bug#959393: ruby2.7 breaks diaspora-installer autopkgtest: sh: 1: bundle: not found

Control: reassign -1 ruby2.7 Control: found -1 2.7.0-6 On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 10:23:56PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > Using system bundler... > Installing gems with rubygems ... > sh: 1: bundle: not found libruby2.7 now has some Provides: for libraries builtin to the standard library, including

[DRE-maint] Bug#959393: ruby2.7 breaks diaspora-installer autopkgtest: sh: 1: bundle: not found

Control: reassign -1 libruby2.7 Control: found -1 2.7.0-6 On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 09:12:57PM -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > Control: reassign -1 ruby2.7 > Control: found -1 2.7.0-6 > > On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 10:23:56PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > > Using system bundler... &

[DRE-maint] Bug#959393: Bug#959393: ruby2.7 breaks diaspora-installer autopkgtest: sh: 1: bundle: not found

On Sat, May 02, 2020 at 02:59:36PM +0200, Daniel Leidert wrote: > Am Freitag, den 01.05.2020, 21:20 -0300 schrieb Antonio Terceiro: > > Control: reassign -1 libruby2.7 > > Control: found -1 2.7.0-6 > > > > On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 09:12:57PM -0300, Antonio Terceiro wro

[DRE-maint] Bug#959981: Trademark concerns with Chef/Cinc package included in Debian and Ubuntu

Hello, This is my attemp at a more detailed response after sleeping on it. On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 11:40:38AM -0700, Lance Albertson wrote: > All, > > I'm a member of the Cinc Project [1] which rebuilds and rebrands various > Chef projects to comply with Chef Trademark Policy [2]. We have

[DRE-maint] Bug#959981: Trademark issues with Chef/Cinc package included in Debian

Package: chef Version: 15.8.25.3.gcf41df6a2-6 Severity: serious X-Debbugs-CC: la...@osuosl.org, maintain...@cinc.sh, be...@chef.io - Forwarded message from Lance Albertson - Date: Thu, 7 May 2020 11:40:38 -0700 From: Lance Albertson To:

[DRE-maint] Bug#959981: Trademark concerns with Chef/Cinc package included in Debian and Ubuntu

On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 03:32:10PM -0400, benny Vasquez wrote: > Thanks, Lance! > > As he laid out, this packaged shipped as-is is a pretty serious violation > of our trademarks, and we'd like to see it addressed as soon as humanly > possible. > > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 2:40 PM Lance Albertson

[DRE-maint] Bug#968485: vagrant-libvirt: Please re-introduce the create_box.sh example script

Hi, On Sun, Aug 16, 2020 at 09:35:11AM +0200, intrig...@debian.org wrote: > Package: vagrant-libvirt > Version: 0.1.2-1 > Severity: wishlist > Tags: patch > User: tails-...@boum.org > Usertags: build-system > > Hi, > > a few years back, in #823317 we added the create_box.sh example script > to

[DRE-maint] Bug#968056: nanoc: missing dependency on ruby-nanoc-cli

Package: nanoc Version: 4.11.14-1 Severity: serious Justification: missind dependency for normal operation Hello, thanks for updating nanoc. After upgrading from 4.11.0, nanoc now fails right away: 8<8<8<- $ nanoc Traceback (most

[DRE-maint] Bug#964899: FTBFS: test suites fails with 1 failures, 8 errors

Source: ruby-net-dns Severity: serious Tags: ftbfs Justification: fails to build from source ruby-new-dns currently fails to build from source in unstable. Several tests fail like this: Error: Minitest::Result#test_should_return_state_without_exception: NoMethodError: undefined method `split'

Re: [DRE-maint] ruby-rubocop-ast_0.1.0-1_amd64.changes is NEW

Hello FTP team On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 03:23:00PM +, Debian FTP Masters wrote: > binary:ruby-rubocop-ast is NEW. > binary:ruby-rubocop-ast is NEW. > source:ruby-rubocop-ast is NEW. This has been extracted from rubocop, and is needed for a new upstream release I started to work on. Can it

[DRE-maint] Bug#974065: Bug#974065: rails: nocheck builds should not depend on qunit-selenium

On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 03:40:15PM +0100, Sven Mueller wrote: > Package: rails > Version: 2:6.0.3.4+dfsg-1 > Tags: patch > > Turns out that this isn't needed and pulls in a lot of dependencies if the > build is done without tests. > > The attached patch moves the start of the redis server (only

[DRE-maint] Bug#972702: ruby-bundler: dependency resolution fails for compiled gems

On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 07:02:06PM -0300, Lucas Kanashiro wrote: > Thanks to David Rodriguez (our dear bundler upstream maintainer :) I was > able to workaround the bug locally and understand a bit better what is going > on. > > The source of this problem is this commit: > >

[DRE-maint] Bug#972702: ruby-bundler: dependency resolution fails for compiled gems

Package: ruby-bundler Version: 2.2.0~rc.1 Severity: grave Justification: renders package unusable 8<8<8<- $ cat Gemfile source 'https://rubygems.org' gem 'ffi' $ bundle --local Could not find gem 'ffi' in any of the gem sources

[DRE-maint] Bug#972702: ruby-bundler: dependency resolution fails for compiled gems

On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 01:21:03PM +0100, David Rodríguez wrote: > El 29/10/20 a las 13:14, Antonio Terceiro escribió: > > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 11:17:59AM +0100, David Rodríguez wrote: > > > Hi! > > > > > > Just to clarify why I prefer the second so

[DRE-maint] Bug#981173: gem2deb: FTBFS on ia64, can't find gem rake with executable rake

Control: tag -1 + wontfix Hello Laurent, On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 10:34:24AM +0100, Laurent Bigonville wrote: > Source: gem2deb > Version: 1.2.1 > Severity: important > Tags: ftbfs > Justification: fails to build from source (but built successfully in the past) > > Hello, > > It looks like that

[DRE-maint] Bug#981850: Bug#981850: Failed: rspec-core, rspec-support

On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 09:02:37PM +0530, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote: > Package: ruby-rspec > Version: 3.9.0c2e2m1s3-1 > Severity: serious > Tags: ftbfs > Justification: fails to build from source > > Dear Maintainer, > > During a rebuild of the package for Bullseye, it is seen that the > package

Re: [DRE-maint] nanoc_4.11.18-1~1_amd64.changes is NEW

Hello FTP Masters, On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 02:37:26PM +, Debian FTP Masters wrote: > binary:ruby-nanoc-checking is NEW. > binary:ruby-nanoc-deploying is NEW. > binary:ruby-nanoc-external is NEW. This is in NEW due to the additional binary packages above. This new upstream version splits its

[DRE-maint] Bug#985569: Bug#985569: ruby-kramdown: CVE-2021-28834

-security; urgency=high + + * Team upload. + * Add upstream patch to fix arbitrary code execution vulnerability +[CVE-2021-28834] (Closes: #985569) + + -- Antonio Terceiro Sat, 03 Apr 2021 13:05:12 -0300 + ruby-kramdown (1.17.0-1+deb10u1) buster-security; urgency=high * Non-maintainer upl

[DRE-maint] Bug#984689: ruby-vcr: DFSG violation (Hippocratic license)

On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 02:50:18PM +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote: > > > On 2021, മാർച്ച് 8 1:24:48 AM IST, Antonio Terceiro > wrote: [...] > >I don't think that will be needed. I reverted to 5.0.0 locally, added a > >few patches, and at least all of our reverse d

[DRE-maint] Bug#984689: ruby-vcr: DFSG violation (Hippocratic license)

On Sun, Mar 07, 2021 at 11:01:16PM +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote: > [adding release team] > > On Sun, Mar 7, 2021 at 10:49 pm, Utkarsh Gupta wrote: > > Hi Praveen, > > > > On Sun, Mar 7, 2021 at 10:15 PM Pirate Praveen > > wrote: > > > It looks like we will have to remove ruby-vcr and we will

[DRE-maint] Bug#986254: gem2deb creates gemspec file as a binary file for ruby-magic-static? gem

On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 02:20:34PM -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 04:49:38PM +0530, Nilesh Patra wrote: > > And I tried changing the second "-lib" entry to ruby-lib (it does not > > mean anything, this is a random example) > > > > an

[DRE-maint] Bug#986254: gem2deb creates gemspec file as a binary file for ruby-magic-static? gem

On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 04:49:38PM +0530, Nilesh Patra wrote: > And I tried changing the second "-lib" entry to ruby-lib (it does not > mean anything, this is a random example) > > and I get the same offending term: ruby lib^@ruby-lib > attaching the output, for ref > > So it looks like more

[DRE-maint] Bug#986806: CVE-2021-28965

On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 03:22:24PM +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote: > On Mon, 12 Apr 2021 12:05:29 +0200 Moritz Muehlenhoff > wrote: > > https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/news/2021/04/05/xml-round-trip-vulnerability-in-rexml-cve-2021-28965/ > > > > Why is there a separate package duplicating rexml from

[DRE-maint] Bug#996363: ruby-rbpdf: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: Error: test: Image get image file test(RbpdfHttpTest): NoMethodError: undefined method `shutdown' for nil:NilClass

Source: ruby-rbpdf Version: 1.20.1-1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-rbpdf was found to fail to build in that

[DRE-maint] Bug#996362: ruby-raindrops: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed.

Source: ruby-raindrops Version: 0.19.0-2 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-raindrops was found to fail to build in that

[DRE-maint] Bug#996343: ruby-openid: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: :85:in `require': cannot load such file -

Source: ruby-openid Version: 2.9.2debian-1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-openid was found to fail to build in that

[DRE-maint] Bug#996344: ruby-openstack: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: Error: test_rebuild_server(ServersTest): NoMethodError: undefined method `encode' for URI:Module

Source: ruby-openstack Version: 2.0.2-1.1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-openstack was found to fail to build in that

[DRE-maint] Bug#996345: ruby-packable: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: ArgumentError: tried to create Proc object without a block

Source: ruby-packable Version: 1.3.14-1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-packable was found to fail to build in that

[DRE-maint] Bug#996348: ruby-process-daemon: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: cannot load such file -- webrick

Source: ruby-process-daemon Version: 1.0.1-2 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-process-daemon was found to fail to build

[DRE-maint] Bug#996349: ruby-public-suffix: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: ArgumentError: wrong number of arguments (given 2, expected 1)

Source: ruby-public-suffix Version: 3.0.3+ds-1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-public-suffix was found to fail to

[DRE-maint] Bug#996346: ruby-parallel: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby2.7" failed: Failure/Error: out.should == "0, 1\nOK"

Source: ruby-parallel Version: 1.21.0-1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-parallel was found to fail to build in that

[DRE-maint] Bug#996347: ruby-prawn: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: ArgumentError:

Source: ruby-prawn Version: 2.3.0+dfsg-1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-prawn was found to fail to build in that

[DRE-maint] Bug#996350: ruby-rabl: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed.

Source: ruby-rabl Version: 0.13.1-1.1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-rabl was found to fail to build in that

[DRE-maint] Bug#996351: ruby-rack-oauth2: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: NoMethodError:

Source: ruby-rack-oauth2 Version: 1.16.0-1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-rack-oauth2 was found to fail to build in

[DRE-maint] Bug#996352: ruby-rack-timeout: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: Error: test_zero_wait_timeout(EnvSettingsTest): ArgumentError: wrong number of arguments (given 2, expected

Source: ruby-rack-timeout Version: 0.5.1-2 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-rack-timeout was found to fail to build in

[DRE-maint] Bug#996353: ruby-rack: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed.

Source: ruby-rack Version: 2.2.3-1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-rack was found to fail to build in that situation.

[DRE-maint] Bug#996342: ruby-omniauth-openid-connect: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: ArgumentError: wrong number of arguments (given 2, expected 0..1)

Source: ruby-omniauth-openid-connect Version: 0.4.0-2 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-omniauth-openid-connect was

[DRE-maint] Bug#996341: ruby-ntlm: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: Failure/Error: dec.encrypt.update(plain) + dec.final

Source: ruby-ntlm Version: 0.6.1-2 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-ntlm was found to fail to build in that situation.

[DRE-maint] Bug#996368: ruby-remcached: FTBFS with ruby3.0: build blocks until timeout if tests fail

Source: ruby-remcached Version: 0.4.1-3 Severity: important Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-remcached was found to fail to build in that situation. To

[DRE-maint] Bug#996369: ruby-responders: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed.

Source: ruby-responders Version: 3.0.1-1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-responders was found to fail to build in that

[DRE-maint] Bug#996370: ruby-rgen: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed.

Source: ruby-rgen Version: 0.8.4-1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-rgen was found to fail to build in that situation.

[DRE-maint] Bug#996384: ruby-serialport: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: :85:in `require': /<>/de

Source: ruby-serialport Version: 1.3.1-1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-serialport was found to fail to build in that

[DRE-maint] Bug#996385: ruby-shadow: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ld: cannot find -lshadow

Source: ruby-shadow Version: 2.5.0-1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-shadow was found to fail to build in that

[DRE-maint] Bug#996386: ruby-sham-rack: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: cannot load such file -- webrick/httputils

Source: ruby-sham-rack Version: 1.4.1-2 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-sham-rack was found to fail to build in that

[DRE-maint] Bug#996387: ruby-sigar: FTBFS with ruby3.0: sigar_util.c:742:10: fatal error: rpc/rpc.h: No such file or directory

Source: ruby-sigar Version: 0.7.3-2 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-sigar was found to fail to build in that

[DRE-maint] Bug#996366: ruby-regexp-parser: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: Failure/Error: (min..max).tap { |r| r.define_singleton_method(:minmax) { [min, max] } }

Source: ruby-regexp-parser Version: 1.7.1-1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-regexp-parser was found to fail to build

[DRE-maint] Bug#996382: ruby-seamless-database-pool: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: ArgumentError:

Source: ruby-seamless-database-pool Version: 1.0.20-1.1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-seamless-database-pool was

[DRE-maint] Bug#996381: ruby-sanitize: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: ArgumentError: wrong number of arguments (given 4, expected 1..3)

Source: ruby-sanitize Version: 5.2.1-2 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-sanitize was found to fail to build in that

[DRE-maint] Bug#996380: ruby-safe-yaml: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: ArgumentError:

Source: ruby-safe-yaml Version: 1.0.5-1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-safe-yaml was found to fail to build in that

[DRE-maint] Bug#996379: ruby-rspec: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: Failure/Error: DEFAULT_FAILURE_NOTIFIER = lambda { |failure, _opts| raise failure }

Source: ruby-rspec Version: 3.9.0c2e2m1s3-2 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-rspec was found to fail to build in that

[DRE-maint] Bug#996378: ruby-rspec-retry: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: Failure/Error:

Source: ruby-rspec-retry Version: 0.6.2-1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-rspec-retry was found to fail to build in

[DRE-maint] Bug#996364: ruby-recursive-open-struct: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: Failure/Error: alias_method :modifiable?, :modifiable

Source: ruby-recursive-open-struct Version: 1.1.1-1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-recursive-open-struct was found to

[DRE-maint] Bug#996377: ruby-rspec-rails: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: ArgumentError:

Source: ruby-rspec-rails Version: 4.0.1-2 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-rspec-rails was found to fail to build in

[DRE-maint] Bug#996372: ruby-roxml: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: NoMethodError:

Source: ruby-roxml Version: 4.0.0-2 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-roxml was found to fail to build in that

[DRE-maint] Bug#996157: ruby-clean-test: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: Error: test_any_symbol_works(TestAny): ArgumentError: wrong number of arguments (given 2, expected 0..1)

Source: ruby-clean-test Version: 1.0.0-1.1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-clean-test was found to fail to build in

[DRE-maint] Bug#996404: ruby-sassc-rails: FTBFS: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed.

Source: ruby-sassc-rails Version: 2.1.2-5+rebuild1633394876 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs Hi, During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build on amd64. Relevant part (hopefully): > /usr/bin/ruby3.0 /usr/bin/gem2deb-test-runner > >

[DRE-maint] Bug#996160: ruby-eventmachine: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed.

Source: ruby-eventmachine Version: 1.3~pre20201020-b50c135-2 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-eventmachine was found to

[DRE-maint] Bug#996161: ruby-rmagick: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: LoadError:

Source: ruby-rmagick Version: 2.16.0-7 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-rmagick was found to fail to build in that

[DRE-maint] Bug#996159: ruby-batch-loader: FTBFS: ERROR: Test "ruby2.7" failed: Failure/Error: result = schema.execute(query)

Source: ruby-batch-loader Version: 2.0.1+dfsg-2 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-batch-loader was found to fail to

[DRE-maint] Bug#996210: ruby-css-parser: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed.

Source: ruby-css-parser Version: 1.6.0-1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-css-parser was found to fail to build in that

[DRE-maint] Bug#996238: ruby-hamster: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: RuntimeError:

Source: ruby-hamster Version: 3.0.0-2 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-hamster was found to fail to build in that

[DRE-maint] Bug#996215: ruby-dbf: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: Failure/Error: @encoding ? value.force_encoding(@encoding).encode(*ENCODING_ARGS) : value

Source: ruby-dbf Version: 3.0.5-1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-dbf was found to fail to build in that situation.

[DRE-maint] Bug#996214: ruby-dataobjects-mysql: FTBFS: chown: cannot access '/usr/lib/mysql/plugin/auth_pam_tool_dir/auth_pam_tool': Permission denied

Source: ruby-dataobjects-mysql Version: 0.10.17-1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-dataobjects-mysql was found to fail

[DRE-maint] Bug#996219: ruby-enumerable-statistics: FTBFS with ruby3.0: statistics.c:67:32: error: ‘RComplex’ undeclared (first use in this function)

Source: ruby-enumerable-statistics Version: 2.0.1+dfsg-3 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-enumerable-statistics was

[DRE-maint] Bug#996220: ruby-escape-utils: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: NoMethodError: undefined method `escape' for URI:Module

Source: ruby-escape-utils Version: 1.2.1-2 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-escape-utils was found to fail to build in

[DRE-maint] Bug#996221: ruby-ethon: FTBFS with ruby3.0: ERROR: Test "ruby3.0" failed: Failure/Error: require 'rack/handler/webrick'

Source: ruby-ethon Version: 0.9.0-2 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org Usertags: ruby3.0 Hi, We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test rebuild, ruby-ethon was found to fail to build in that

  1   2   3   4   5   >