On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 8:14 AM Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Please provide a proper "how to test" section, I cannot fix what I cannot test or compare results when I have no idea what I am seeing. > > > > Actually, last time I heard about number of packages, it was around 50k (not source, build result), and as I stated, > > Ruby is missing, and so are quite a few dependent packages that should have GCC involved somewhere: > > ~~~ > > $ dnf repoquery --whatrequires "*libruby.so*" --disablerepo="*" --enablerepo="fedora" 2>/dev/null | grep -v "i686" | uniq | wc -l > > 115 > > ~~~ > > > > If we also filter rubygem-* packages that depend on the *libruby.so* (and most probably contain a binary extension written in C/C++ that links to Ruby), I get 68 packages. > > When I search "All x86_64" for "ruby" I get 28 packages. That is... not adding up. > > Yeah, I have missed packages; I had looked at revdeps glibc-devel, > which turned out around 9k packages, of which 6k had any > _FORTIFY_SOURCE use at all. I can redo with *all* packages and > generate a report. I checked again and it looks like ruby had failed in that mass rebuild[1] but I can't see the logs anymore; they've probably been garbage collected. I reckon it was one of those with a transient failure that I reran by hand later. I'm going to run a full rebuild anyway (should take about 8 days, about 23k source packages AFAICT) and will share the results here. Thanks, Sid [1] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/siddhesh/mpb.41/builds/ _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
