Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 1923630 - rubygem-prawn-svg: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f34
Summary: rubygem-prawn-svg: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f34
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: rubygem-prawn-svg
Version: 34
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Christopher Brown
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On: 1933315
Blocks: F34FTBFS 1923597
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2021-02-01 17:21 UTC by Fedora Release Engineering
Modified: 2021-03-15 08:15 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

Fixed In Version: rubygem-prawn-svg-0.32.0-1.fc35 rubygem-prawn-svg-0.32.0-1.fc34
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2021-03-15 08:15:34 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)
build.log (27.22 KB, text/plain)
2021-02-01 17:21 UTC, Fedora Release Engineering 		no flags Details
root.log (32.00 KB, text/plain)
2021-02-01 17:21 UTC, Fedora Release Engineering 		no flags Details
state.log (1.00 KB, text/plain)
2021-02-01 17:21 UTC, Fedora Release Engineering 		no flags Details
View All


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Github mogest prawn-svg issues 135 0 None open Test failures with Ruby 3 2021-02-13 23:00:24 UTC

Description Fedora Release Engineering 2021-02-01 17:21:14 UTC 
rubygem-prawn-svg failed to build from source in Fedora rawhide/f34

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=60913239


For details on the mass rebuild see:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_34_Mass_Rebuild
Please fix rubygem-prawn-svg at your earliest convenience and set the bug's status to
ASSIGNED when you start fixing it. If the bug remains in NEW state for 8 weeks,
rubygem-prawn-svg will be orphaned. Before branching of Fedora 35,
rubygem-prawn-svg will be retired, if it still fails to build.

For more details on the FTBFS policy, please visit:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Fails_to_build_from_source_Fails_to_install/
Comment 1 Fedora Release Engineering 2021-02-01 17:21:16 UTC 
Created attachment 1753840 [details]
build.log
Comment 2 Fedora Release Engineering 2021-02-01 17:21:18 UTC 
Created attachment 1753841 [details]
root.log

file root.log too big, will only attach last 32768 bytes
Comment 3 Fedora Release Engineering 2021-02-01 17:21:18 UTC 
Created attachment 1753842 [details]
state.log
Comment 4 Christopher Brown 2021-02-07 22:43:47 UTC 
Linked upstream GitHub issue.
Comment 5 Ben Cotton 2021-02-09 15:58:37 UTC 
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 34 development cycle.
Changing version to 34.
Comment 6 Michel Alexandre Salim 2021-02-26 07:36:23 UTC 
Seems to not just be the integration tests that are failing?

The error in build.log:

+ rspec -rprawn-svg spec
An error occurred while loading prawn-svg.
Failure/Error: require 'rexml/document'
LoadError:
  cannot load such file -- rexml/document

matches the error when rebuilding nickle (which uses asciidoctor-pdf and prawn-svg)
Comment 7 Michel Alexandre Salim 2021-02-26 07:39:40 UTC 
aha, rexml is no longer a default gem in 3.0:
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/16485
https://github.com/rails/rails/commit/c23533ee0b50fdc67cc73b579674637ba6f34cb4
Comment 8 Michel Alexandre Salim 2021-02-26 07:52:37 UTC 
looks like it's a known issue upstream, this PR is referenced in the upstream bug: https://github.com/mogest/prawn-svg/pull/133

as a preparation, might be worth packaging rexml in Fedora.
Comment 9 Christopher Brown 2021-02-26 10:36:00 UTC 
(In reply to Michel Alexandre Salim from comment #8)

> as a preparation, might be worth packaging rexml in Fedora.

No need, we can just do:

BuildRequires: rubygem(rexml)
Comment 10 Christopher Brown 2021-02-26 10:42:42 UTC 
(In reply to Christopher Brown from comment #9)
> (In reply to Michel Alexandre Salim from comment #8)
> 
> > as a preparation, might be worth packaging rexml in Fedora.
> 
> No need, we can just do:
> 
> BuildRequires: rubygem(rexml)

Have pushed this but tests still failing, obviously.
Comment 11 Michel Alexandre Salim 2021-02-26 17:21:17 UTC 
(In reply to Christopher Brown from comment #10)
> (In reply to Christopher Brown from comment #9)
> > (In reply to Michel Alexandre Salim from comment #8)
> > 
> > > as a preparation, might be worth packaging rexml in Fedora.
> > 
> > No need, we can just do:
> > 
> > BuildRequires: rubygem(rexml)
> 
> Have pushed this but tests still failing, obviously.

Because that gem is not packaged in Fedora at the moment.

I put up a review request for it: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933315 -- if you could review that'd be great!
Comment 12 Christopher Brown 2021-02-26 20:25:59 UTC 
(In reply to Michel Alexandre Salim from comment #11)
> (In reply to Christopher Brown from comment #10)
> > (In reply to Christopher Brown from comment #9)
> > > (In reply to Michel Alexandre Salim from comment #8)
> > > 
> > > > as a preparation, might be worth packaging rexml in Fedora.
> > > 
> > > No need, we can just do:
> > > 
> > > BuildRequires: rubygem(rexml)
> > 
> > Have pushed this but tests still failing, obviously.
> 
> Because that gem is not packaged in Fedora at the moment.

No, it is packaged as part of the main ruby package:

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ruby/blob/rawhide/f/ruby.spec#_1400

The test errors are a function of updating Ruby to 3.0 and the changes wrt to separation of positional and keyword arguments:

https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/news/2019/12/12/separation-of-positional-and-keyword-arguments-in-ruby-3-0/
https://github.com/mogest/prawn-svg/pull/133/commits/78bd0fa2e409badfa1084a35599c51c2260dd7fd
Comment 13 Michel Alexandre Salim 2021-03-01 05:50:19 UTC 
(In reply to Christopher Brown from comment #12)
> (In reply to Michel Alexandre Salim from comment #11)
> > (In reply to Christopher Brown from comment #10)
> > > (In reply to Christopher Brown from comment #9)
> > > > (In reply to Michel Alexandre Salim from comment #8)
> > > > 
> > > > > as a preparation, might be worth packaging rexml in Fedora.
> > > > 
> > > > No need, we can just do:
> > > > 
> > > > BuildRequires: rubygem(rexml)
> > > 
> > > Have pushed this but tests still failing, obviously.
> > 
> > Because that gem is not packaged in Fedora at the moment.
> 
> No, it is packaged as part of the main ruby package:
> 
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ruby/blob/rawhide/f/ruby.spec#_1400
> 
ah, makes sense, thanks
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.