Dne 08. 11. 24 v 21:50 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
On 08. 11. 24 15:44, David Bold wrote:The policy is applied:https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/RROZC3KFCF6G4RRMKEM4NXJ4PTFFROTT/The question is, why is rubygem-hashie not on the list ...That's a good question.Because it is not in Rawhide repo at all. And I use the rawhide repo to query dist tags of the latest builds.
Could it be to somehow explicitly added into FTBFS list?
3 years ago, it was retired (because it was orphaned for 6+ weeks, presumably because it did not build -- but it could have been anything else).It was then unretired via https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11038 After that, it was never built. As such, it makes no harm.
Aha. I have apparently hit the issue before: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2127693 Thx for looking into this. If anything else, it is listed e.g. here: https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mass-rebuild/f41-failures.html So it causes some issues.
Anyway, Vít, you can follow step 3 at https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Fails_to_build_from_source_Fails_to_install/#_package_removal_for_long_standing_ftbfs_and_fti_bugs
I have added NEEDINFO, but I still believe it should rather be explicitly included in the FTBFS list somehow.
Vít
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- _______________________________________________ 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
