[Bug 2161518] Review Request: python-y-py - Python bindings for the Y-CRDT built from yrs (Rust)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2161518



--- Comment #18 from Fabio Valentini <decathorpe@xxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to Lumír Balhar from comment #15)
> Spec URL: https://lbalhar.fedorapeople.org/python-y-py.spec
> SRPM URL: https://lbalhar.fedorapeople.org/python-y-py-0.5.5-1.fc37.src.rpm
> 
> I have applied all the suggestions and it doesn't build now - the problem is
> with the debuginfo package:
> 
> Provides: python-y-py = 0.5.5-1.fc38 python3-y-py = 0.5.5-1.fc38
> python3-y-py(x86-64) = 0.5.5-1.fc38 python3.11-y-py = 0.5.5-1.fc38
> python3.11dist(y-py) = 0.5.5 python3dist(y-py) = 0.5.5
> Requires(rpmlib): rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests)
> <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
> Requires: ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit)
> ld-linux-x86-64.so.2(GLIBC_2.3)(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit)
> libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.14)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.17)(64bit)
> libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.18)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
> libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.25)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.28)(64bit)
> libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.2)(64bit)
> libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.33)(64bit)
> libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.34)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
> libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3)(64bit)
> libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_4.2.0)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit)
> libm.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) python(abi) = 3.11 rtld(GNU_HASH)
> Processing files: python-y-py-debugsource-0.5.5-1.fc38.x86_64
> error: Empty %files file
> /builddir/build/BUILD/y_py-0.5.5/debugsourcefiles.list
> 
> RPM build errors:
>     Empty %files file /builddir/build/BUILD/y_py-0.5.5/debugsourcefiles.list
> Finish: rpmbuild python-y-py-0.5.5-1.fc38.src.rpm
> Finish: build phase for python-y-py-0.5.5-1.fc38.src.rpm

This looks like debuginfo is indeed not valid / not present.
Looking at the build log, the package doesn't use default Rust compiler flags,
either (i.e. all `%build_rustflags` are absent from rustc calls in the log).
Maybe there's an issue with how you ported the package from maturin to
setuptools_rust that makes it ignore the flags set in ".cargo/config"?

> The last build can be found here:
> https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/lbalhar/notebook/build/5310880/
> 
> I cannot remember why I added the %global definition there so I looked at
> the other rust packages and it seems that a lot of them have it as well,
> I've found 1780 of them. The reason might be that rust2rpm has it in the
> template:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-rust/rust2rpm/blob/main/f/rust2rpm/templates/main.
> spec#_6
> Although I'm not sure what the condition around that macro in the template
> means.

It means that source-only packages don't get debuginfo. All packages that ship
binaries *do* get debuginfo.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2161518
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-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/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Conditions]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux