Re: Ruby 2.4 - Mass rebuild

2017-01-17 Thread Vít Ondruch


Dne 15.1.2017 v 08:24 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a):
>
>  6rubygem-puma-3.6.0-4.fc26.src.rpm
> ragel issue is tracked on:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1402582


I succeeded to build Puma. On 5th attempt approximately ;)

V.
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4 - Mass rebuild

2017-01-14 Thread Mamoru TASAKA

Hello, all:

Just for update:
$ repoquery --disablerepo=\* --enablerepo=koji-rawhide --qf "%{SOURCERPM}" --whatrequires 
"libruby.so.2.3()(64bit)" | sort | uniq | cat -n

Yum-utils package has been deprecated, use dnf instead.
See 'man yum2dnf' for more information.


 1  libdmtx-0.7.2-19.fc24.src.rpm
 2  redland-bindings-1.0.16.1-16.fc25.src.rpm
 3  ruby-korundum-4.14.3-10.fc24.src.rpm
 4  rubygem-kgio-2.10.0-1.fc26.src.rpm
 5  rubygem-pcaprub-0.12.4-1.fc26.src.rpm
 6  rubygem-puma-3.6.0-4.fc26.src.rpm
ragel issue is tracked on:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1402582

 7  shogun-4.1.0-7.fc26.src.rpm
 8  zorba-3.0.0-26.20140621git152f8964c.fc25.src.rpm

Regards,
Mamoru

Mamoru TASAKA wrote on 01/13/2017 04:04 PM:

Hello, all:

- 元のメッセージ -

差出人: "Vít Ondruch" 
Just a quick update about status.

So far, we have built most of the rubygem-packages, 66 in total. These
are the remaining:



Just checked for library dependency:


$ repoquery --disablerepo=\* --enablerepo=koji-ruby24 --qf "%{SOURCERPM}" --whatrequires 
"libruby.so.2.3()(64bit)" | sort | uniq | cat -n

Yum-utils package has been deprecated, use dnf instead.
See 'man yum2dnf' for more information.

 1  libdmtx-0.7.2-19.fc24.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17264227
Perhaps due to php side change.

 2  libprelude-3.1.0-27.fc26.src.rpm
still building: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=833091
However, it seems that test suite is hanging. Note that koji build will be 
killed
after 24 hours (I remember), so I guess this build will fail soon (or I rekick
this later, maybe)

 3  pcs-0.9.155-1.fc26.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17263481
Perhaps due to rubygem-json update which changed error format: reported 
upstream:
https://github.com/ClusterLabs/pcs/issues/126

 4  postgresql-plruby-0.5.4-11.fc26.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17263489 integer 
unitication

 5  redland-bindings-1.0.16.1-16.fc25.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17263493
due to php side change

 6  ruby-augeas-0.5.0-9.fc24.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17263551
BuildRequires seems fixing, at least

 7  ruby-korundum-4.14.3-10.fc24.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17263769
okular was KF5-ized -> broken deps on smokekde

 8  ruby-ldap-0.9.16-6.fc24.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17263610
Looks like now C binding build creates some additional files, perhaps
removing such files is enough??

 9  rubygem-json-1.8.3-103.fc25.src.rpm
Not have checked.

10  rubygem-kgio-2.10.0-1.fc26.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17253487
Test fails on some archs (aarch64, ppc64, ppc64le), don't know why

11  rubygem-pcaprub-0.12.4-1.fc26.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17264381
Missing BR deps on %check (just disabling %check for now??)

12  rubygem-pg-0.18.4-2.fc24.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17264419
Test fails, don't know why

13  rubygem-puma-3.6.0-4.fc26.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17264553
Fails only on armv7hl, looks like issue with ragel.

14  shogun-4.1.0-7.fc26.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17263929
Looks like eigen3 3.2.10 -> 3.3.1 change is the cause, not related to ruby

15  subversion-1.9.5-1.fc26.src.rpm
Now building: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=833585
scratch build was okay: 
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17263808

16  uwsgi-2.0.14-4.fc26.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17263965
Fails only on armv7hl, don't know what is happening:

/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -ljvm
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status


17  zorba-3.0.0-26.20140621git152f8964c.fc25.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17264061
Looks like doxygen is segfaulting, not related to ruby.

While we can wait for subversion build to finish, I think now we can merge
f26-ruby24 side tag into main f26.

Regards,
Mamoru
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org



___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4 - Mass rebuild

2017-01-13 Thread Vít Ondruch
Hi everybody,

The sidetag with Ruby 2.4 and all the rebuilt packages is undergoing
merge into F26 right now [1]. Since the update of Ruby involved soname
bump, we managed to rebuild most of the depending packages. But there is
still about 10 packages which are broken for various reasons (you can
see the analysis of them here [2]). We will try to fix them, but of
course, any help is welcome.

Also, please check your pure Ruby packages for compatibility with Ruby
2.4. Most of the stuff should work just fine, but this particular change
[3] tends to break some stuff.

Let us know if you need some help ...

And special thanks goes to Mamoru, who handled the major part of the
rebuild.

Regards,


Vít


[1] https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6579
[2]
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/VDMH2RPF7SCI5LEN3E4SYJHOCABHWLQV/
[3] https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/ruby_2_4/NEWS#L288
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4 - Mass rebuild

2017-01-13 Thread Vít Ondruch


Dne 13.1.2017 v 08:04 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a):
>
> 11rubygem-pcaprub-0.12.4-1.fc26.src.rpm
> FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17264381
> Missing BR deps on %check (just disabling %check for now??)
>

Now I remember the package. It is passing in Koschei, however, the thing
is that the dependencies used to be and later they were removed,
probably based on my review comment, that we are trying to avoid usage
of bundler ... Well, I didn't really mean it to avoid it this way ;)
Will take a look at this later.


Vít
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4 - Mass rebuild

2017-01-13 Thread Vít Ondruch


Dne 13.1.2017 v 08:04 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a):
>
>  4postgresql-plruby-0.5.4-11.fc26.src.rpm
> FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17263489 integer 
> unitication
>
>
>  6ruby-augeas-0.5.0-9.fc24.src.rpm
> FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17263551
> BuildRequires seems fixing, at least

These are already fixed.
>  8ruby-ldap-0.9.16-6.fc24.src.rpm
> FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17263610
> Looks like now C binding build creates some additional files, perhaps
> removing such files is enough??

Well, I took a brief look and postponed the fixes  But this
packaging issue. The package itself builds.

> 12rubygem-pg-0.18.4-2.fc24.src.rpm
> FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17264419
> Test fails, don't know why

https://bitbucket.org/ged/ruby-pg/issues/255/ruby-24-test-failure

>
> 13rubygem-puma-3.6.0-4.fc26.src.rpm
> FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17264553
> Fails only on armv7hl, looks like issue with ragel.

Will check this. There is update available, may be it fixes something ...

> While we can wait for subversion build to finish, I think now we can merge
> f26-ruby24 side tag into main f26.

I finish my run (and may be do one more to confirm your findings) and
ask rel-engs for merge.

BTW thx for the massive help!



Vít

___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4 - Mass rebuild

2017-01-12 Thread Mamoru TASAKA
Hello, all:

- 元のメッセージ -
> 差出人: "Vít Ondruch" 
> Just a quick update about status.
> 
> So far, we have built most of the rubygem-packages, 66 in total. These
> are the remaining:
> 

Just checked for library dependency:


$ repoquery --disablerepo=\* --enablerepo=koji-ruby24 --qf "%{SOURCERPM}" 
--whatrequires "libruby.so.2.3()(64bit)" | sort | uniq | cat -n

Yum-utils package has been deprecated, use dnf instead.
See 'man yum2dnf' for more information.

 1  libdmtx-0.7.2-19.fc24.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17264227
Perhaps due to php side change.

 2  libprelude-3.1.0-27.fc26.src.rpm
still building: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=833091
However, it seems that test suite is hanging. Note that koji build will be 
killed
after 24 hours (I remember), so I guess this build will fail soon (or I rekick
this later, maybe)

 3  pcs-0.9.155-1.fc26.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17263481
Perhaps due to rubygem-json update which changed error format: reported 
upstream:
https://github.com/ClusterLabs/pcs/issues/126

 4  postgresql-plruby-0.5.4-11.fc26.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17263489 integer 
unitication

 5  redland-bindings-1.0.16.1-16.fc25.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17263493
due to php side change

 6  ruby-augeas-0.5.0-9.fc24.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17263551
BuildRequires seems fixing, at least

 7  ruby-korundum-4.14.3-10.fc24.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17263769
okular was KF5-ized -> broken deps on smokekde

 8  ruby-ldap-0.9.16-6.fc24.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17263610
Looks like now C binding build creates some additional files, perhaps
removing such files is enough??

 9  rubygem-json-1.8.3-103.fc25.src.rpm
Not have checked.

10  rubygem-kgio-2.10.0-1.fc26.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17253487
Test fails on some archs (aarch64, ppc64, ppc64le), don't know why

11  rubygem-pcaprub-0.12.4-1.fc26.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17264381
Missing BR deps on %check (just disabling %check for now??)

12  rubygem-pg-0.18.4-2.fc24.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17264419
Test fails, don't know why

13  rubygem-puma-3.6.0-4.fc26.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17264553
Fails only on armv7hl, looks like issue with ragel.

14  shogun-4.1.0-7.fc26.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17263929
Looks like eigen3 3.2.10 -> 3.3.1 change is the cause, not related to ruby

15  subversion-1.9.5-1.fc26.src.rpm
Now building: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=833585
scratch build was okay: 
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17263808

16  uwsgi-2.0.14-4.fc26.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17263965
Fails only on armv7hl, don't know what is happening:
> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -ljvm
> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status

17  zorba-3.0.0-26.20140621git152f8964c.fc25.src.rpm
FAIL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17264061
Looks like doxygen is segfaulting, not related to ruby.

While we can wait for subversion build to finish, I think now we can merge
f26-ruby24 side tag into main f26.

Regards,
Mamoru
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4 - Mass rebuild

2017-01-12 Thread Jun Aruga
Hi,

rubygem-activesupport
FTBFS for Ruby 2.4.0.
I uploaded a patch to fix Ruby 2.4.0 compatiblity.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1412628

Other rails related packages might also have issues for Ruby 2.4.0.

Jun Aruga

- Original Message -
> From: "Vít Ondruch" <vondr...@redhat.com>
> To: ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 7:07:29 PM
> Subject: Re: Ruby 2.4 - Mass rebuild
> 
> Just a quick update about status.
> 
> So far, we have built most of the rubygem-packages, 66 in total. These
> are the remaining:
> 
> rubygem-nio4r
> rubygem-puma
> ^^ There are updates available, so I skipped this. Will discuss with Jun
> next steps.
> 
> rubygem-json
> ^^ There is json as subpackage of Ruby and this would need more
> attention, since it is broken already if I am not mistaken => low
> priority ATM.
> 
> rubygem-pg
> ^^ {Big,Fix}num => Integer issue. I notified upstream, so far without
> response.
> 
> rubygem-rkerberos
> ^^ Does not build on PPC for some reason. Secondary arch guys will take
> a look.
> rubygem-escape_utils
> 
> rubygem-qpid_messaging
> ^^ This is broken for ages
> 
> rubygem-kgio
> rubygem-pcaprub
> rubygem-posix-spawn
> ^^ I don't remember anymore, probably some packaging issues.
> 
> So far the rebuild was quite smooth, but the {Big,Fix}num will cause
> more pain. As of now, I am aware that there are some packages (diff_lcs,
> builder) which are used in some projects and they fire quite some
> warnings (but there is upstream activity to fix this). Due to this
> warnings and this change itself, there might be other broken packages,
> e.g. rubygem-cucumber-wire will be FTBFS due to excessive warnings.
> 
> I'll look tomorrow on the non-rubygem packages.
> 
> 
> Vít
> ___
> ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> 
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4 - Mass rebuild

2017-01-12 Thread Vít Ondruch


Dne 11.1.2017 v 23:38 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a):
> Vít Ondruch wrote on 01/12/2017 02:42 AM:
>>
>> Dne 11.1.2017 v 13:52 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
>>>
>>> Dne 11.1.2017 v 13:28 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a):
 Vít Ondruch wrote on 01/10/2017 05:31 PM:
> Hi all,
>
> So finally time for some fun. Since the Ruby 2.4 change proposal
> [1] was
> accepted, I asked release engineering for sidetag [3] to start with
> rebuild. This sidetag was granted and I was able to build there Ruby
> itself as well as several of my packages. Now is time for your help
> as well.
>
> 
 Well,


 Running transaction check
 Running transaction test

 Transaction check error:
   file /usr/share/ruby/openssl from install of
 rubygem-openssl-2.0.2-71.fc26.x86_64 conflicts with file from package
 ruby-libs-2.3.3-61.1.fc25.x86_64

 Well, /usr/share/ruby/openssl in ruby-libs-2.3.3-61.1.fc25.x86_64 was
 directory,
 now rubygem-openssl-2.0.2-71.fc26.x86_64 has /usr/share/ruby/openssl
 symlink.
 This can't be done easily, if this change is really needed, some
 special
 treatment is needed:

 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Directory_Replacement

 Instead, I think changing /usr/share/ruby/openssl to directory
 again is
 easier. Vít, would you fix this?
>>> Good catch! Will take a look. I probably have not tried update since
>>> the
>>> OpenSSL got extracted into independent gem :/
>>
>> If you have a chance, please test this scratch build (if/when finishes):
>>
>> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17247367
>>
>> Will push it tomorrow 
>>
>
> This works, thank you!

This should be in Koji now 


Vít
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4 - Mass rebuild

2017-01-12 Thread Jun Aruga
Though it's up to you, for example we do not need to check Fedora version in 
the macro by below way.

> +  sed -i "s|\"$f\"${FREEZE},||g" %{gem_name}.gemspec

sed -i -E 's|"'$f'"(.freeze)?, ||g' %{gem_name}.gemspec

Jun Aruga

- Original Message -
> From: "Vít Ondruch" <vondr...@redhat.com>
> To: ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2017 10:24:55 AM
> Subject: Re: Ruby 2.4 - Mass rebuild
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Seeing commit as this:
> 
> 
> ```
> 
> @@ -44,9 +44,13 @@ gem unpack %{SOURCE0}
>  gem spec %{SOURCE0} -l --ruby > %{gem_name}.gemspec
>  
>  # Remove developer-only files.
> +FREEZE=""
> +%if 0%{?fedora} >= 26
> +FREEZE=".freeze"
> +%endif
>  for f in .gitignore Gemfile Rakefile; do
>rm $f
> -  sed -i "s|\"$f\",||g" %{gem_name}.gemspec
> +  sed -i "s|\"$f\"${FREEZE},||g" %{gem_name}.gemspec
>  done
>  
>  # Skip tests that fail.
> 
> ```
> 
> (BTW is that sed in the loop?!?)
> 
> I just want to remind you, that we have the %gemspec_remove_dep and
> %gemspec_add_dep macros available in all Fedoras. You can see their
> usage here:
> 
> 
> http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/rubygem-scruffy.git/commit/?id=be086316f1d752da8135c01b86a03efa8372b25b
> 
> 
> Still thinking where to document such stuff. I am very much in favor of
> splitting such documentation in a similar manned as Java guys did, but I
> am still indecisive ...
> 
> 
> Vít
> 
> 
> 
> Dne 10.1.2017 v 09:31 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> > Hi all,
> >
> > So finally time for some fun. Since the Ruby 2.4 change proposal [1] was
> > accepted, I asked release engineering for sidetag [3] to start with
> > rebuild. This sidetag was granted and I was able to build there Ruby
> > itself as well as several of my packages. Now is time for your help as
> > well.
> >
> > What does it means? This is the list of packages which very likely needs
> > to be rebuild:
> >
> >
> > ```
> > $ dnf repoquery --disablerepo=* --enablerepo=rawhide
> > --enablerepo=rawhide-source --arch=src --whatrequires 'ruby-devel' |
> > sort | uniq
> >
> > ```
> >
> >
> > You can take the package and just fire rebuild, but please, you should
> > be using f26-ruby24 build target [3], i.e. the build command should look
> > like:
> >
> >
> > ```
> > $ fedpkg build --target f26-ruby24
> >
> > ```
> >
> >
> > If you forget to specify the target, you'll do build against Ruby 2.3,
> > which is not what you want.
> >
> > If you don't make it soon enough, I'll very likely rebuild your package
> > sooner or later. I'll be using fermig [4] to do that as I did during
> > previous rebuilds. If you don't like me to touch you package for
> > whatever reason, please let me know (Mamoru, I suppose you are going to
> > rebuild your packages yourself, right?).
> >
> > You can follow the progress at:
> >
> > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/builds?inherited=0=401=-build_id=1
> >
> > or using:
> >
> >
> > ```
> > $ koji list-tagged f26-ruby24
> > ```
> >
> > As always, any help/testing/feedback is welcome.
> >
> > Vít
> >
> >
> > [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Ruby_2.4
> > [2] https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1659
> > [3] https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6579
> > [4] https://github.com/fedora-ruby/fermig
> > ___
> > ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> ___
> ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> 
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4 - Mass rebuild

2017-01-12 Thread Vít Ondruch


Dne 12.1.2017 v 10:37 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a):
> Hello,
>
> - 元のメッセージ -
>> 差出人: "Vít Ondruch" <vondr...@redhat.com>
>> 宛先: ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> 送信済み: 2017年1月12日, 木曜日 18:24:55
>> 件名: Re: Ruby 2.4 - Mass rebuild
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Seeing commit as this:
>>
>>
>> ```
>>
>> @@ -44,9 +44,13 @@ gem unpack %{SOURCE0}
>>  gem spec %{SOURCE0} -l --ruby > %{gem_name}.gemspec
>>  
>>  # Remove developer-only files.
>> +FREEZE=""
>> +%if 0%{?fedora} >= 26
>> +FREEZE=".freeze"
>> +%endif
>>  for f in .gitignore Gemfile Rakefile; do
>>rm $f
>> -  sed -i "s|\"$f\",||g" %{gem_name}.gemspec
>> +  sed -i "s|\"$f\"${FREEZE},||g" %{gem_name}.gemspec
>>  done
>>  
>>  # Skip tests that fail.
>>
>> ```
>>
>> (BTW is that sed in the loop?!?)
>>
>> I just want to remind you, that we have the %gemspec_remove_dep and
>> %gemspec_add_dep macros available in all Fedoras. You can see their
>> usage here:
>>
>> http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/rubygem-scruffy.git/commit/?id=be086316f1d752da8135c01b86a03efa8372b25b
> Well, %gemspec_remove_dep is for gem "dependency" (i.e. to change "Requires: 
> rubygem(foo)" on
> rpm side), right? What this do here is to change (remove) file entry
> in gem. sed loop is to remove one file by one file, so that afterwards
> we just have to modify "$f" list afterwards (perhaps).

You are right of course. This actually removes the files from file list
entries. I was not paying enough attention :(

I should probably spend some time to prepare some macro changing the
file list, since it is the second most common .gemspec modification 
Well ...


Vít
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4 - Mass rebuild

2017-01-12 Thread Mamoru TASAKA
Hello,

- 元のメッセージ -
> 差出人: "Vít Ondruch" <vondr...@redhat.com>
> 宛先: ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
> 送信済み: 2017年1月12日, 木曜日 18:24:55
> 件名: Re: Ruby 2.4 - Mass rebuild
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Seeing commit as this:
> 
> 
> ```
> 
> @@ -44,9 +44,13 @@ gem unpack %{SOURCE0}
>  gem spec %{SOURCE0} -l --ruby > %{gem_name}.gemspec
>  
>  # Remove developer-only files.
> +FREEZE=""
> +%if 0%{?fedora} >= 26
> +FREEZE=".freeze"
> +%endif
>  for f in .gitignore Gemfile Rakefile; do
>rm $f
> -  sed -i "s|\"$f\",||g" %{gem_name}.gemspec
> +  sed -i "s|\"$f\"${FREEZE},||g" %{gem_name}.gemspec
>  done
>  
>  # Skip tests that fail.
> 
> ```
> 
> (BTW is that sed in the loop?!?)
> 
> I just want to remind you, that we have the %gemspec_remove_dep and
> %gemspec_add_dep macros available in all Fedoras. You can see their
> usage here:
> 
> http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/rubygem-scruffy.git/commit/?id=be086316f1d752da8135c01b86a03efa8372b25b

Well, %gemspec_remove_dep is for gem "dependency" (i.e. to change "Requires: 
rubygem(foo)" on
rpm side), right? What this do here is to change (remove) file entry
in gem. sed loop is to remove one file by one file, so that afterwards
we just have to modify "$f" list afterwards (perhaps).

> Still thinking where to document such stuff. I am very much in favor of
> splitting such documentation in a similar manned as Java guys did, but I
> am still indecisive ...
> 
> 
> Vít
> 

Regards,
Mamoru

> 
> Dne 10.1.2017 v 09:31 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> > Hi all,
> >
> > So finally time for some fun. Since the Ruby 2.4 change proposal [1] was
> > accepted, I asked release engineering for sidetag [3] to start with
> > rebuild. This sidetag was granted and I was able to build there Ruby
> > itself as well as several of my packages. Now is time for your help as
> > well.
> >
> > What does it means? This is the list of packages which very likely needs
> > to be rebuild:
> >
> >
> > ```
> > $ dnf repoquery --disablerepo=* --enablerepo=rawhide
> > --enablerepo=rawhide-source --arch=src --whatrequires 'ruby-devel' |
> > sort | uniq
> >
> > ```
> >
> >
> > You can take the package and just fire rebuild, but please, you should
> > be using f26-ruby24 build target [3], i.e. the build command should look
> > like:
> >
> >
> > ```
> > $ fedpkg build --target f26-ruby24
> >
> > ```
> >
> >
> > If you forget to specify the target, you'll do build against Ruby 2.3,
> > which is not what you want.
> >
> > If you don't make it soon enough, I'll very likely rebuild your package
> > sooner or later. I'll be using fermig [4] to do that as I did during
> > previous rebuilds. If you don't like me to touch you package for
> > whatever reason, please let me know (Mamoru, I suppose you are going to
> > rebuild your packages yourself, right?).
> >
> > You can follow the progress at:
> >
> > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/builds?inherited=0=401=-build_id=1
> >
> > or using:
> >
> >
> > ```
> > $ koji list-tagged f26-ruby24
> > ```
> >
> > As always, any help/testing/feedback is welcome.
> >
> > Vít
> >
> >
> > [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Ruby_2.4
> > [2] https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1659
> > [3] https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6579
> > [4] https://github.com/fedora-ruby/fermig
> > ___
> > ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> ___
> ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> 
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4 - Mass rebuild

2017-01-12 Thread Vít Ondruch
Hi all,

Seeing commit as this:


```

@@ -44,9 +44,13 @@ gem unpack %{SOURCE0}
 gem spec %{SOURCE0} -l --ruby > %{gem_name}.gemspec
 
 # Remove developer-only files.
+FREEZE=""
+%if 0%{?fedora} >= 26
+FREEZE=".freeze"
+%endif
 for f in .gitignore Gemfile Rakefile; do
   rm $f
-  sed -i "s|\"$f\",||g" %{gem_name}.gemspec
+  sed -i "s|\"$f\"${FREEZE},||g" %{gem_name}.gemspec
 done
 
 # Skip tests that fail.

```

(BTW is that sed in the loop?!?)

I just want to remind you, that we have the %gemspec_remove_dep and
%gemspec_add_dep macros available in all Fedoras. You can see their
usage here:


http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/rubygem-scruffy.git/commit/?id=be086316f1d752da8135c01b86a03efa8372b25b


Still thinking where to document such stuff. I am very much in favor of
splitting such documentation in a similar manned as Java guys did, but I
am still indecisive ...


Vít



Dne 10.1.2017 v 09:31 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> Hi all,
>
> So finally time for some fun. Since the Ruby 2.4 change proposal [1] was
> accepted, I asked release engineering for sidetag [3] to start with
> rebuild. This sidetag was granted and I was able to build there Ruby
> itself as well as several of my packages. Now is time for your help as well.
>
> What does it means? This is the list of packages which very likely needs
> to be rebuild:
>
>
> ```
> $ dnf repoquery --disablerepo=* --enablerepo=rawhide
> --enablerepo=rawhide-source --arch=src --whatrequires 'ruby-devel' |
> sort | uniq
>
> ```
>
>
> You can take the package and just fire rebuild, but please, you should
> be using f26-ruby24 build target [3], i.e. the build command should look
> like:
>
>
> ```
> $ fedpkg build --target f26-ruby24
>
> ```
>
>
> If you forget to specify the target, you'll do build against Ruby 2.3,
> which is not what you want.
>
> If you don't make it soon enough, I'll very likely rebuild your package
> sooner or later. I'll be using fermig [4] to do that as I did during
> previous rebuilds. If you don't like me to touch you package for
> whatever reason, please let me know (Mamoru, I suppose you are going to
> rebuild your packages yourself, right?).
>
> You can follow the progress at:
>
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/builds?inherited=0=401=-build_id=1
>
> or using:
>
>
> ```
> $ koji list-tagged f26-ruby24
> ```
>
> As always, any help/testing/feedback is welcome.
>
> Vít
>
>
> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Ruby_2.4
> [2] https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1659
> [3] https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6579
> [4] https://github.com/fedora-ruby/fermig
> ___
> ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4 - Mass rebuild

2017-01-11 Thread Mamoru TASAKA

Vít Ondruch wrote on 01/12/2017 02:42 AM:


Dne 11.1.2017 v 13:52 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):


Dne 11.1.2017 v 13:28 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a):

Vít Ondruch wrote on 01/10/2017 05:31 PM:

Hi all,

So finally time for some fun. Since the Ruby 2.4 change proposal [1] was
accepted, I asked release engineering for sidetag [3] to start with
rebuild. This sidetag was granted and I was able to build there Ruby
itself as well as several of my packages. Now is time for your help
as well.



Well,


Running transaction check
Running transaction test

Transaction check error:
  file /usr/share/ruby/openssl from install of
rubygem-openssl-2.0.2-71.fc26.x86_64 conflicts with file from package
ruby-libs-2.3.3-61.1.fc25.x86_64

Well, /usr/share/ruby/openssl in ruby-libs-2.3.3-61.1.fc25.x86_64 was
directory,
now rubygem-openssl-2.0.2-71.fc26.x86_64 has /usr/share/ruby/openssl
symlink.
This can't be done easily, if this change is really needed, some special
treatment is needed:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Directory_Replacement

Instead, I think changing /usr/share/ruby/openssl to directory again is
easier. Vít, would you fix this?

Good catch! Will take a look. I probably have not tried update since the
OpenSSL got extracted into independent gem :/


If you have a chance, please test this scratch build (if/when finishes):

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17247367

Will push it tomorrow 



This works, thank you!

Regards,
Mamoru




Vít
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org



___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4 - Mass rebuild

2017-01-11 Thread Vít Ondruch
Just a quick update about status.

So far, we have built most of the rubygem-packages, 66 in total. These
are the remaining:

rubygem-nio4r
rubygem-puma
^^ There are updates available, so I skipped this. Will discuss with Jun
next steps.

rubygem-json
^^ There is json as subpackage of Ruby and this would need more
attention, since it is broken already if I am not mistaken => low
priority ATM.

rubygem-pg
^^ {Big,Fix}num => Integer issue. I notified upstream, so far without
response.

rubygem-rkerberos
^^ Does not build on PPC for some reason. Secondary arch guys will take
a look.
rubygem-escape_utils

rubygem-qpid_messaging
^^ This is broken for ages

rubygem-kgio
rubygem-pcaprub
rubygem-posix-spawn
^^ I don't remember anymore, probably some packaging issues.

So far the rebuild was quite smooth, but the {Big,Fix}num will cause
more pain. As of now, I am aware that there are some packages (diff_lcs,
builder) which are used in some projects and they fire quite some
warnings (but there is upstream activity to fix this). Due to this
warnings and this change itself, there might be other broken packages,
e.g. rubygem-cucumber-wire will be FTBFS due to excessive warnings.

I'll look tomorrow on the non-rubygem packages.


Vít
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4 - Mass rebuild

2017-01-11 Thread Vít Ondruch


Dne 11.1.2017 v 13:52 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
>
> Dne 11.1.2017 v 13:28 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a):
>> Vít Ondruch wrote on 01/10/2017 05:31 PM:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> So finally time for some fun. Since the Ruby 2.4 change proposal [1] was
>>> accepted, I asked release engineering for sidetag [3] to start with
>>> rebuild. This sidetag was granted and I was able to build there Ruby
>>> itself as well as several of my packages. Now is time for your help
>>> as well.
>>>
>>> 
>> Well,
>>
>>
>> Running transaction check
>> Running transaction test
>>
>> Transaction check error:
>>   file /usr/share/ruby/openssl from install of
>> rubygem-openssl-2.0.2-71.fc26.x86_64 conflicts with file from package
>> ruby-libs-2.3.3-61.1.fc25.x86_64
>>
>> Well, /usr/share/ruby/openssl in ruby-libs-2.3.3-61.1.fc25.x86_64 was
>> directory,
>> now rubygem-openssl-2.0.2-71.fc26.x86_64 has /usr/share/ruby/openssl
>> symlink.
>> This can't be done easily, if this change is really needed, some special
>> treatment is needed:
>>
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Directory_Replacement
>>
>> Instead, I think changing /usr/share/ruby/openssl to directory again is
>> easier. Vít, would you fix this?
> Good catch! Will take a look. I probably have not tried update since the
> OpenSSL got extracted into independent gem :/

If you have a chance, please test this scratch build (if/when finishes):

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17247367

Will push it tomorrow 



Vít
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4 - Mass rebuild

2017-01-11 Thread Vít Ondruch


Dne 11.1.2017 v 13:28 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a):
> Vít Ondruch wrote on 01/10/2017 05:31 PM:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> So finally time for some fun. Since the Ruby 2.4 change proposal [1] was
>> accepted, I asked release engineering for sidetag [3] to start with
>> rebuild. This sidetag was granted and I was able to build there Ruby
>> itself as well as several of my packages. Now is time for your help
>> as well.
>>
>> 
>
> Well,
>
>
> Running transaction check
> Running transaction test
>
> Transaction check error:
>   file /usr/share/ruby/openssl from install of
> rubygem-openssl-2.0.2-71.fc26.x86_64 conflicts with file from package
> ruby-libs-2.3.3-61.1.fc25.x86_64
>
> Well, /usr/share/ruby/openssl in ruby-libs-2.3.3-61.1.fc25.x86_64 was
> directory,
> now rubygem-openssl-2.0.2-71.fc26.x86_64 has /usr/share/ruby/openssl
> symlink.
> This can't be done easily, if this change is really needed, some special
> treatment is needed:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Directory_Replacement
>
> Instead, I think changing /usr/share/ruby/openssl to directory again is
> easier. Vít, would you fix this?

Good catch! Will take a look. I probably have not tried update since the
OpenSSL got extracted into independent gem :/


Vít
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4 - Mass rebuild

2017-01-11 Thread Mamoru TASAKA

Vít Ondruch wrote on 01/10/2017 05:31 PM:

Hi all,

So finally time for some fun. Since the Ruby 2.4 change proposal [1] was
accepted, I asked release engineering for sidetag [3] to start with
rebuild. This sidetag was granted and I was able to build there Ruby
itself as well as several of my packages. Now is time for your help as well.




Well,


Running transaction check
Running transaction test

Transaction check error:
  file /usr/share/ruby/openssl from install of 
rubygem-openssl-2.0.2-71.fc26.x86_64 conflicts with file from package 
ruby-libs-2.3.3-61.1.fc25.x86_64

Well, /usr/share/ruby/openssl in ruby-libs-2.3.3-61.1.fc25.x86_64 was directory,
now rubygem-openssl-2.0.2-71.fc26.x86_64 has /usr/share/ruby/openssl symlink.
This can't be done easily, if this change is really needed, some special
treatment is needed:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Directory_Replacement

Instead, I think changing /usr/share/ruby/openssl to directory again is
easier. Vít, would you fix this?

Regards,
Mamoru
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4

2017-01-02 Thread Mamoru TASAKA

Hello, again:

Vít Ondruch wrote on 01/02/2017 05:48 PM:



Dne 1.1.2017 v 10:04 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a):

Hello, again:

Vít Ondruch wrote on 09/15/2016 12:35 AM:



Dne 14.9.2016 v 17:18 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a):

Hello, Vít:

Vít Ondruch wrote on 09/13/2016 12:01 AM:

When I did the last snapshot, I mentioned, that Tcl/Tk was moved into
gem. But upstream took step further and dropped the Tcl/Tk support
from
the Ruby stdlib entirely. The tk gem is the only option now. Hence I
dropped the subpackage as well. The only caveat is that there is not
good place to obsolete this package. I figured out that I place the
obsoletes into ruby-libs to remove the ruby-tcltk package from the
system, but if you have any better idea, please let me know.


Perhaps packaging ruby/tk is the smartest:
https://github.com/ruby/tk

Looks like the git log or so, the above seems to be exactly the
replacement
for previously rubylib Tcl/Tk.


Yes, it should be drop in replacement as far as I understand it.


If you don't have time, I may try packaging in a week or two weeks.



Sorry for very looong delay, however not I've submitted
review request for rubygem-tk:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409355


Just wondering about the "Obsoletes: ruby-tcltk < 2.4.0". Have you
tested it against the Ruby 2.4? Should I remove the "Obsoleted" from the
ruby-libs?



Well, I have not tried ruby 2.4 yet. And while I think it is better
"Obsoletes: ruby-tcltk" is on rubygem-tk (as rubygem-tk is the replacement
for current ruby-tcltk), it can be on ruby-libs: either will be okay, perhaps.

Regards,
Mamoru

___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4

2017-01-02 Thread Vít Ondruch


Dne 1.1.2017 v 10:04 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a):
> Hello, again:
>
> Vít Ondruch wrote on 09/15/2016 12:35 AM:
>>
>>
>> Dne 14.9.2016 v 17:18 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a):
>>> Hello, Vít:
>>>
>>> Vít Ondruch wrote on 09/13/2016 12:01 AM:
 When I did the last snapshot, I mentioned, that Tcl/Tk was moved into
 gem. But upstream took step further and dropped the Tcl/Tk support
 from
 the Ruby stdlib entirely. The tk gem is the only option now. Hence I
 dropped the subpackage as well. The only caveat is that there is not
 good place to obsolete this package. I figured out that I place the
 obsoletes into ruby-libs to remove the ruby-tcltk package from the
 system, but if you have any better idea, please let me know.

>>> Perhaps packaging ruby/tk is the smartest:
>>> https://github.com/ruby/tk
>>>
>>> Looks like the git log or so, the above seems to be exactly the
>>> replacement
>>> for previously rubylib Tcl/Tk.
>>
>> Yes, it should be drop in replacement as far as I understand it.
>>
>>> If you don't have time, I may try packaging in a week or two weeks.
>>
>> If I am not mistaken, there is nothing in Fedora, what would depend on
>> ruby-tcltk, so for me it is very little priority. Thank you if you are
>> going to pickup the maintenance.
>>
>
> Sorry for very looong delay, however not I've submitted
> review request for rubygem-tk:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409355

Just wondering about the "Obsoletes: ruby-tcltk < 2.4.0". Have you
tested it against the Ruby 2.4? Should I remove the "Obsoleted" from the
ruby-libs?


Vít
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4

2017-01-01 Thread Mamoru TASAKA

Hello, again:

Vít Ondruch wrote on 09/15/2016 12:35 AM:



Dne 14.9.2016 v 17:18 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a):

Hello, Vít:

Vít Ondruch wrote on 09/13/2016 12:01 AM:

When I did the last snapshot, I mentioned, that Tcl/Tk was moved into
gem. But upstream took step further and dropped the Tcl/Tk support from
the Ruby stdlib entirely. The tk gem is the only option now. Hence I
dropped the subpackage as well. The only caveat is that there is not
good place to obsolete this package. I figured out that I place the
obsoletes into ruby-libs to remove the ruby-tcltk package from the
system, but if you have any better idea, please let me know.


Perhaps packaging ruby/tk is the smartest:
https://github.com/ruby/tk

Looks like the git log or so, the above seems to be exactly the
replacement
for previously rubylib Tcl/Tk.


Yes, it should be drop in replacement as far as I understand it.


If you don't have time, I may try packaging in a week or two weeks.


If I am not mistaken, there is nothing in Fedora, what would depend on
ruby-tcltk, so for me it is very little priority. Thank you if you are
going to pickup the maintenance.



Sorry for very looong delay, however not I've submitted
review request for rubygem-tk:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409355

I have another review request for rubygem-clutter-gdk :
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409288

Review swap is welcomed.

Regards,
Mamoru

___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4

2016-12-23 Thread Vít Ondruch
Hi,

This is the latest build of snapshot of Ruby 2.4 prior its official
release. This time r57159:

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17036895

Let me know if you encounter any issues with this build.


Vít
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4 change proposal

2016-12-12 Thread Vít Ondruch
No feedback, so I flipped the bit to ChangeReadyForWrangler.


V.



Dne 6.12.2016 v 14:16 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> Hi rubyists,
>
> I put together change proposal for Ruby 2.4 in Fedora 26 [1]. Any
> feedback is welcome. If no feedback, I'll propose this change to package
> wrangler in a week or so ...
>
>
> Vít
>
>
>
> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Ruby_2.4
>
> ___
> ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4

2016-12-01 Thread Vít Ondruch
Hi everybody,


Here is yet another snapshot build of Ruby 2.4, this time r56948:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16692858

Please give it shot as we are approaching 25th of December, when the
stable release should be available, and if you encounter any issues,
please let me know.


Vít




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4

2016-11-10 Thread Vít Ondruch
Hi Rubyists,

You probably noticed, that Ruby 2.4.0-preview3 was released yesterday
[1]. But since the preview was of r56661 and my last build from r56664,
there is no point to prepare package of -preview3.

Nevertheless, since the development continues, there is already r56693
available upstream and I made testing build for this release:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16383885

From the upstream POV, I don't think there is anything exciting. But for
me, it is exciting, that I was able to make the test suite pass the
build using "mock --new-chroot". In this case, mock is using
systemd-nspawn on the backround instead of plain chroot (and this might
become default in the future). This uncovered several shortcomings of
the test suite and some of them are already fixed upstream.

If you have any feedback, don't hesitate and let me know.


V.




[1]
https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/news/2016/11/09/ruby-2-4-0-preview3-released/

___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4

2016-11-07 Thread Vít Ondruch
Hi everybody,

Once again, here is development snapshot of Ruby 2.4, this time r56664

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16334921

I have not noticed anything interesting in particular. The only
interesting thing probably is that PPC was enabled for Rawhide and of
course it caused some issues. Some of them were already fixed upstream,
some are waiting for the fix. Please give it a try and as always, any
feedback is welcome.


Vít
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4

2016-10-18 Thread Vít Ondruch
Hi all,

Here is again new development snapshot of Ruby 2.4, this time r56436:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16106776

I did not notice anything special about this, but one noteworthy change
is compilation against OpenSSL 1.1.0. There was one issue [1] with
Fedora OpenSSL, which should be resolved now. But please give it some
testing.

Speaking about OpenSSL, it is interesting if upstream decide to backport
OpenSSL 1.1.0 support into older version of Ruby or not. You can follow
the discussion here [2].


Vít


[1] https://github.com/ruby/openssl/issues/77

[2] https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/12830


Dne 27.5.2016 v 22:37 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> Hi everybody,
>
> Time is running past and it is almost 6 months of development of Ruby
> 2.4. So I started to prepare some test build again. I am pushing all the
> changes into private-ruby-2.4 branch of dist-git if you are interested
> and here is the build of r55184:
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=14278233
>
> One notable change is that XMLRPC library was extracted into separate
> gem, so rubygem-xmlrpc is now available as Ruby subpackage.
>
> Please give it a try and let me know if anything goes wrong.
>
>
> Vít
>
> ___
> ruby-sig mailing list
> ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4

2016-09-14 Thread Mamoru TASAKA

Hello, Vít:

Vít Ondruch wrote on 09/13/2016 12:01 AM:

Hi all,

-preview2 of the Ruby 2.4 [1] was released by upstream and here is the
test build for you (ARM is not finished yet, but I hope it will pass):

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15602333

You can find the necessary changes in private-ruby-2.4 branch of dist-git.

When I did the last snapshot, I mentioned, that Tcl/Tk was moved into
gem. But upstream took step further and dropped the Tcl/Tk support from
the Ruby stdlib entirely. The tk gem is the only option now. Hence I
dropped the subpackage as well. The only caveat is that there is not
good place to obsolete this package. I figured out that I place the
obsoletes into ruby-libs to remove the ruby-tcltk package from the
system, but if you have any better idea, please let me know.

Vít

[1]
https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/news/2016/09/08/ruby-2-4-0-preview2-released/


Perhaps packaging ruby/tk is the smartest:
https://github.com/ruby/tk

Looks like the git log or so, the above seems to be exactly the replacement
for previously rubylib Tcl/Tk.

If you don't have time, I may try packaging in a week or two weeks.

Regards,
Mamoru

___
ruby-sig mailing list
ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4

2016-09-12 Thread Vít Ondruch
Hi all,

-preview2 of the Ruby 2.4 [1] was released by upstream and here is the
test build for you (ARM is not finished yet, but I hope it will pass):

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15602333

You can find the necessary changes in private-ruby-2.4 branch of dist-git.

When I did the last snapshot, I mentioned, that Tcl/Tk was moved into
gem. But upstream took step further and dropped the Tcl/Tk support from
the Ruby stdlib entirely. The tk gem is the only option now. Hence I
dropped the subpackage as well. The only caveat is that there is not
good place to obsolete this package. I figured out that I place the
obsoletes into ruby-libs to remove the ruby-tcltk package from the
system, but if you have any better idea, please let me know.


Vít



[1]
https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/news/2016/09/08/ruby-2-4-0-preview2-released/

___
ruby-sig mailing list
ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4

2016-08-31 Thread Vít Ondruch
And one more fast iteration (r56050):

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15450242

since upstream fixed some outstanding issues with build of native
extensions of bundled gems.


Vít



Dne 31.8.2016 v 09:44 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> Hi,
>
>
> I am back with another test build of Ruby 2.4 snapshot, this time
> r56029. You can find the sources in private-ruby-2.4 branch in dist-git
> and here is the scratch build:
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15438057
>
>
> There are two notable changes. Upstream extracted Tcl/Tk support into
> independent gem so did I. You probably want to test that upgrade path
> from ruby-tcltk to rubygem-tk works as expected.
>
> Also, upstream extracted OpenSSL into independent gem. So I followed.
> ruby package recommends installation of rubygem-openssl and rubygems has
> hard dependency on it, so rubygem-openssl should be installed in most of
> the cases.
>
>
> Please let me know if you encounter any issues. Thx.
>
>
> Vít
>
>
>
>
> Dne 27.5.2016 v 22:37 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
>> Hi everybody,
>>
>> Time is running past and it is almost 6 months of development of Ruby
>> 2.4. So I started to prepare some test build again. I am pushing all the
>> changes into private-ruby-2.4 branch of dist-git if you are interested
>> and here is the build of r55184:
>>
>> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=14278233
>>
>> One notable change is that XMLRPC library was extracted into separate
>> gem, so rubygem-xmlrpc is now available as Ruby subpackage.
>>
>> Please give it a try and let me know if anything goes wrong.
>>
>>
>> Vít
>>
>> ___
>> ruby-sig mailing list
>> ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
> ___
> ruby-sig mailing list
> ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
ruby-sig mailing list
ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4

2016-08-31 Thread Vít Ondruch
Hi,


I am back with another test build of Ruby 2.4 snapshot, this time
r56029. You can find the sources in private-ruby-2.4 branch in dist-git
and here is the scratch build:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15438057


There are two notable changes. Upstream extracted Tcl/Tk support into
independent gem so did I. You probably want to test that upgrade path
from ruby-tcltk to rubygem-tk works as expected.

Also, upstream extracted OpenSSL into independent gem. So I followed.
ruby package recommends installation of rubygem-openssl and rubygems has
hard dependency on it, so rubygem-openssl should be installed in most of
the cases.


Please let me know if you encounter any issues. Thx.


Vít




Dne 27.5.2016 v 22:37 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> Hi everybody,
>
> Time is running past and it is almost 6 months of development of Ruby
> 2.4. So I started to prepare some test build again. I am pushing all the
> changes into private-ruby-2.4 branch of dist-git if you are interested
> and here is the build of r55184:
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=14278233
>
> One notable change is that XMLRPC library was extracted into separate
> gem, so rubygem-xmlrpc is now available as Ruby subpackage.
>
> Please give it a try and let me know if anything goes wrong.
>
>
> Vít
>
> ___
> ruby-sig mailing list
> ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
ruby-sig mailing list
ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4

2016-06-28 Thread Vít Ondruch
And one more fresher build:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=14682262

This time it is r55513. Enjoy.


Vít



Dne 27.6.2016 v 17:16 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> Hi all,
>
> -preview1 of the Ruby 2.4 [1] was released by upstream quite early this
> development pahse and here is the test build for you:
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=14672998
>
> You can find the necessary changes in private-ruby-2.4 branch of dist
> git. And as always, please let me know if you have any comments.
>
>
> Vít
>
>
>
> [1]
> https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/news/2016/06/20/ruby-2-4-0-preview1-released/
> ___
> ruby-sig mailing list
> ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
ruby-sig mailing list
ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org


Re: Ruby 2.4

2016-05-28 Thread Vít Ondruch


Dne 27.5.2016 v 22:37 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> Hi everybody,
>
> Time is running past and it is almost 6 months of development of Ruby
> 2.4. So I started to prepare some test build again. I am pushing all the
> changes into private-ruby-2.4 branch of dist-git if you are interested
> and here is the build of r55184:
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=14278233
>
> One notable change is that XMLRPC library was extracted into separate
> gem, so rubygem-xmlrpc is now available as Ruby subpackage.

Actually, there are probably more significant changes. Now I remember
that Bignum and Fixnume were merged into Integer if I am not mistaken.
That might break something ...


Vít

>
> Please give it a try and let me know if anything goes wrong.
>
>
> Vít
>
> ___
> ruby-sig mailing list
> ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
ruby-sig mailing list
ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org