Hello,

This is the first reminder (step 3 from https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Fails_to_build_from_source_Fails_to_install/#_package_removal_for_long_standing_ftbfs_and_fti_bugs).

If you know about this problem and are planning on fixing it, please acknowledge so by setting the bug status to ASSIGNED. If you don't have time to maintain this package, consider orphaning it, so maintainers of dependent packages realize the problem.

(In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #1)
> Hello,
> 
> This is the first reminder (step 3 from
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/
> Fails_to_build_from_source_Fails_to_install/
> #_package_removal_for_long_standing_ftbfs_and_fti_bugs).
> 
> If you know about this problem and are planning on fixing it, please
> acknowledge so by setting the bug status to ASSIGNED. If you don't have time
> to maintain this package, consider orphaning it, so maintainers of dependent
> packages realize the problem.

Change your attitude, Miro!

Filing a bug and then threatening maintainers this way one week later, is just rude and hostile.

You are in error to believe your behavior is helpful. You seem to be missing that volunteer contributor are working on Fedora in their spare time and are not your subordinates.

Ralf, the message is automated. I am sorry that it offended you.

If you have an idea for better wording, feel free to propose it at https://pagure.io/releng/issues or contact me by email, there is no reason to clutter this bugzilla with it.

If you think bugzillas like this one are not helpful, feel free to discuss that with others (and not just me) via the usual communication channels, e.g. https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/2ZKJ7FWMOIXERV5AFH6I5G5R5WRLQTU3/

I'm just the messenger here, following a Fedora-wise approved policy. This is not my ill will.

If you wish to be spared such Bugzillas without changing the policy, consider testing future updates for installability prior to shipping them. The Zuul CI has the ability to do that for the packager: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zuul-based-ci

Sorry, the link was supposed to be just https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/

In the meantime, I've opened:

https://pagure.io/releng/pull-request/11167 Stress out that the FTI bugzilla reminders are automated
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11168 Change the attitutde of the FTI reminder bugzilla comments
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11169 Dedicated bugzilla account/email address for the FTI bugzillas

This bug is caused by a behavioral change/regression somewhere in rpm, mock or related.


Rationale: The only difference between 5.0.3-1 and 5.0.3-2 is a change to the license-tag:

diff --git a/rt.spec b/rt.spec
index 39f8f31..3fbc8c0 100644
--- a/rt.spec
+++ b/rt.spec
@@ -52,10 +52,10 @@ Requires: mod_fcgid
 
 Name:          rt
 Version:       5.0.3
-Release:       1%{?dist}
+Release:       2%{?dist}
 Summary:       Request tracker
 
-License:       GPLv2+
+License:       GPL-2.0-or-later
 URL:           https://bestpractical.com/request-tracker
 Source0:       https://download.bestpractical.com/pub/rt/release/rt-%{version}.tar.gz
 # Notes on running the testsuite
@@ -648,6 +648,9 @@ fi
 %endif
 
 %changelog
+* Mon Nov 28 2022 Ralf Corsépius <corsepiu> - 5.0.3-2
+- Convert license to SPDX.
+
 * Wed Jul 27 2022 Ralf Corsépius <corsepiu> - 5.0.3-1
 - Upgrade to 5.0.3.


Rebuilding rt with current rpm/mock/... on fc37 and rawhide (Haven't tried < fc37) pulls in this bogus requires on both on fc38 and fc37.
Former builts did not, as can be clearly seen in the released rt-5.0.3-1.fc37.noarch.rpm

I'll likely apply a __requires_exclude filter to this package to work around this rpm/mock/.. regression.

Snide side remark: This incident demonstrates that 
- the SPDX-license change stuff is as not harmless, as those people who are enforcing it probably thought.
- some changes went into Fedora 37 which breaks rebuilding fc37 rpm.

FEDORA-2022-84b97d66f5 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-84b97d66f5

> This bug is caused by a behavioral change/regression somewhere in rpm, mock or related.

I've opened bz2150992 for the problem.

Looking at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rt/c/f8b483ba61a51d43152395f9ff0d6e49d2e3034a?branch=rawhide

I think the second definition of the __requires_exclude macro overrides the first one.

(In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #9)
> Looking at
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rt/c/
> f8b483ba61a51d43152395f9ff0d6e49d2e3034a?branch=rawhide
> 
> I think the second definition of the __requires_exclude macro overrides the
> first one.

Mea culpa, it does not.

(In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #10)
> (In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #9)
> > Looking at
> > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rt/c/
> > f8b483ba61a51d43152395f9ff0d6e49d2e3034a?branch=rawhide
> > 
> > I think the second definition of the __requires_exclude macro overrides the
> > first one.
> 
> Mea culpa, it does not.

Exactly. It appends. This construct is being used in many perl-*.rpms

FEDORA-2022-84b97d66f5 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

FWIW: This rpm/mock/whatever regression has not yet affected f36.

May-be this rings a bell to somebody ;)

(In reply to Ralf Corsepius from comment #13)
> FWIW: This rpm/mock/whatever regression has not yet affected f36.
> 
> May-be this rings a bell to somebody ;)

As said in bz2150992, this is introduced in perl-generators 1.14.