Display info messages

---

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

Source: ruby-in-parallel
Version: 0.1.17-1.2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
This is the same failure as #979700 -- I can still reproduce it with the
updated package.
Relevant part (hopefully):
>      Failure/Error: expect(@result_3).to_not eq(true)
>
>        expected: value != true
>             got: true
>
>        (compared using ==)
>      # ./spec/in-paralell_spec.rb:137:in `block (2 levels) in <top (required)>'
>
> Finished in 9.92 seconds (files took 0.10551 seconds to load)
> 19 examples, 1 failure
>
> Failed examples:
>
> rspec ./spec/in-paralell_spec.rb:130 # .run_in_parallel should raise an exception and return immediately with kill_all_on_error and one of the processes errors.
>
> /usr/bin/ruby2.7 -I/usr/share/rubygems-integration/all/gems/rspec-support-3.9.3/lib:/usr/share/rubygems-integration/all/gems/rspec-core-3.9.2/lib /usr/share/rubygems-integration/all/gems/rspec-core-3.9.2/exe/rspec --pattern ./spec/\*\*/\*_spec.rb --format documentation failed
> ERROR: Test "ruby2.7" failed:
The full build log is available from:
   http://qa-logs.debian.net/2021/01/20/ruby-in-parallel_0.1.17-1.2_unstable.log
A list of current common problems and possible solutions is available at
http://wiki.debian.org/qa.debian.org/FTBFS . You're welcome to contribute!
If you reassign this bug to another package, please marking it as 'affects'-ing
this package. See https://www.debian.org/Bugs/server-control#affects
If you fail to reproduce this, please provide a build log and diff it with me
so that we can identify if something relevant changed in the meantime.
About the archive rebuild: The rebuild was done on EC2 VM instances from
Amazon Web Services, using a clean, minimal and up-to-date chroot. Every
failed build was retried once to eliminate random failures.

---

Message #10 received at 980585@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

Hi Utkarsh,
since you took care of the last upload, do you also plan to fix this
FTBFS? If not, please let me know and I'll look into it.
Cheers,
--
Seb

---

Message #15 received at 980585@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

Hi Sébastien,
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 11:37 AM Sébastien Delafond <seb@debian.org> wrote:
> since you took care of the last upload, do you also plan to fix this
> FTBFS? If not, please let me know and I'll look into it.
I've started to look into it already but I wasn't able to reproduce
it. All tests pass for me + autopkgtest (which is what I fixed last
time). So I am not sure what's going wrong here.
If you have some time and can take a look as well, that'd be really
helpful. If you find something, let me know.
- u

---

Message #20 received at 980585@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

Hi Sébastien,
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 11:51 AM Utkarsh Gupta <utkarsh@debian.org> wrote:
> I've started to look into it already but I wasn't able to reproduce
> it. All tests pass for me + autopkgtest (which is what I fixed last
> time). So I am not sure what's going wrong here.
Aah, okay. So I ran sbuild + autopkgtest 10 times, all passed for me.
But when I ran these tests locally with rake, it failed for me exactly
like the report just for the first time. And then passed all 9 times
afterward.
Then I tried to trace back the origin of this problem but couldn't
find anything. I am not sure what's causing this (I haven't gone
through the source thoroughly) but I am inclined towards skipping this
test if that's OK with you?
It'd be best if we fix it but I am not sure if it's worth a lot of
time. Let me know what you think?
Best,
Utkarsh

---

Message #25 received at 980585@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

On 21/01 12:31, Utkarsh Gupta wrote:
> Aah, okay. So I ran sbuild + autopkgtest 10 times, all passed for me.
> But when I ran these tests locally with rake, it failed for me exactly
> like the report just for the first time. And then passed all 9 times
> afterward.
I haven't been able to reproduce it here: local rake, autopkgtest+lxc,
autopkgtest+qemu.
> Then I tried to trace back the origin of this problem but couldn't
> find anything. I am not sure what's causing this (I haven't gone
> through the source thoroughly) but I am inclined towards skipping this
> test if that's OK with you?
It definitely looks like a race, so I agree we can skip it if we create
an upstream bug documenting the issue.
Cheers,
--
Seb

---

Message #30 received at 980585@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

Hi Sébastien,
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 12:42 PM Sébastien Delafond <seb@debian.org> wrote:
> > Aah, okay. So I ran sbuild + autopkgtest 10 times, all passed for me.
> > But when I ran these tests locally with rake, it failed for me exactly
> > like the report just for the first time. And then passed all 9 times
> > afterward.
>
> I haven't been able to reproduce it here: local rake, autopkgtest+lxc,
> autopkgtest+qemu.
Aah.
> > Then I tried to trace back the origin of this problem but couldn't
> > find anything. I am not sure what's causing this (I haven't gone
> > through the source thoroughly) but I am inclined towards skipping this
> > test if that's OK with you?
>
> It definitely looks like a race, so I agree we can skip it if we create
> an upstream bug documenting the issue.
I can create an issue in the original fork. However, just know that
this library is *not* being maintained at all. So there won't be much
help from anywhere.
Either way, I'd also like to mention that we did a build for
ruby-in-parallel against ruby3.0 and everything seems to work,
including those tests as well. See logs here:
https://people.debian.org/~kanashiro/ruby3.0/builds/3/ruby-in-parallel/ruby-in-parallel_0.1.17-1.1+rebuild1610557786_amd64-2021-01-13T17:09:48Z.build
Best,
Utkarsh

---

Message #35 received at 980585@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

On 21/01 12:46, Utkarsh Gupta wrote:
> I can create an issue in the original fork. However, just know that
> this library is *not* being maintained at all. So there won't be much
> help from anywhere.
I'm not expecting upstream to fix it either, but it'd feel more
comfortable to close this bug on our side while still linking to an
existing upstream issue.
> Either way, I'd also like to mention that we did a build for
> ruby-in-parallel against ruby3.0 and everything seems to work,
> including those tests as well.
Ideally we'd only skip this test in 2.x, while keeping it in 3.0 to see
if same race eventually pops up on debci.
Cheers,
--
Seb

---

Message #40 received at 980585@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 12:50 PM Sébastien Delafond <seb@debian.org> wrote:
> I'm not expecting upstream to fix it either, but it'd feel more
> comfortable to close this bug on our side while still linking to an
> existing upstream issue.
Of course. Here it is: https://github.com/samwoods1/in-parallel/issues/8
Feel free to add more if I missed something.
> Ideally we'd only skip this test in 2.x, while keeping it in 3.0 to see
> if same race eventually pops up on debci.
Yeah, but I'd rather keep it disabled now and then re-work it when
working on the interpreter transition.
That said, I am preparing an upload for this as we speak! :)
Best,
Utkarsh

---

Message #45 received at 980585-close@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

Source: ruby-in-parallel
Source-Version: 0.1.17-1.3
Done: Utkarsh Gupta <utkarsh@debian.org>
We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
ruby-in-parallel, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive.
A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.
Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to 980585@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.
Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Utkarsh Gupta <utkarsh@debian.org> (supplier of updated ruby-in-parallel package)
(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2021 12:57:41 +0530
Source: ruby-in-parallel
Architecture: source
Version: 0.1.17-1.3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Freexian Packaging Team <team+freexian@tracker.debian.org>
Changed-By: Utkarsh Gupta <utkarsh@debian.org>
Closes: 980585
Changes:
 ruby-in-parallel (0.1.17-1.3) unstable; urgency=medium
 .
   * Non-maintainer upload.
   * Add patch to skip random test failure. (Closes: #980585)
Checksums-Sha1:
 c4551c25313fe5e08be3bb48accd00b45a992a20 2117 ruby-in-parallel_0.1.17-1.3.dsc
 a7960e381659c0efd6fbaeb63544684a29364b8c 2616 ruby-in-parallel_0.1.17-1.3.debian.tar.xz
 32db3e13397593bac379ba1592605c0effbae602 9587 ruby-in-parallel_0.1.17-1.3_amd64.buildinfo
Checksums-Sha256:
 ac10f8e61960af1a820262b70247fd74e074fa2f272a0f72c52930f31cf90f3f 2117 ruby-in-parallel_0.1.17-1.3.dsc
 f993ebdcfcec07e9f24422601d173a888f12aa9cf83ece980a669a6fd3692bae 2616 ruby-in-parallel_0.1.17-1.3.debian.tar.xz
 a21a5d83555e1964e4d1ca9e99a4b66fc1cf5d36a05a2d4a1ad891241655c361 9587 ruby-in-parallel_0.1.17-1.3_amd64.buildinfo
Files:
 64064facc362fba7dcfc6c34dc2d1c14 2117 ruby optional ruby-in-parallel_0.1.17-1.3.dsc
 a23116463d859dc5cee5db066e214eb4 2616 ruby optional ruby-in-parallel_0.1.17-1.3.debian.tar.xz
 8623c78b71d4dde0be26cb52b8b5307c 9587 ruby optional ruby-in-parallel_0.1.17-1.3_amd64.buildinfo
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQJHBAEBCAAxFiEEbJ0QSEqa5Mw4X3xxgj6WdgbDS5YFAmAJLYETHHV0a2Fyc2hA
ZGViaWFuLm9yZwAKCRCCPpZ2BsNLlkGTD/wN0tVkPz44QohOzdAS/JIWafnMadNN
YwI0Pce7NmnYSVdFtGRvLm9DUOMy9iDgRd0+vgo03bRAoopjACbbttuAq3kCipI6
bM9g89KFMnbubzDSgyesQLFaKbL31VY0WLJUULXN03dEoVjYPnqgGHHCcp99ZR4q
AfrHR30QrzR2v2qfOhszLZetGlR3jKolhOWJDzXMV2c5a9PtbbPEi5erWO1+ZZHd
8VsIiBdWylsszA9Eo/n3Mt3aMkqS86lIUNjDD5utt0TjijYdeBh/SwP5L/0TPGY8
vtTU7Na7v3TzR3zffKODKEnIoXxuQuFIOxOaAjrJ4LDVsueLcke81TnvNymrR0g7
noAIDgjgAcAbFNfnuWItK/OLUUukiQ8hdpXU6d08vNkaHkZsuG7VM8g7ptxksdr8
jtF+EyzMgxObWU1godY8XvymOQm9aUqjk8rlF8MBZG0AZ/1Voj+RP+RUmFhsxTPw
WG9RUuFNfhci3oe2MfBLyM/IcCd3NY8u+kF2zjkrKxM2AE6AovbAHsIUxuNcBOAf
uEDPsNJt38dPBwzv6rKiu4MfdzA1v+BS3C2pROSeUUbOZKSNrkr537zkXKNapCXI
rfHwUwH8smScV6x5Oa3+grxdv3dH7vyLR1xrNvh+eqDIkJqtB16ppcBNuXGkhjsJ
mgoO6hSGHHdVQg==
=dn1X
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.

---

Debian bug tracking system administrator <owner@bugs.debian.org>. Last modified: Mon Aug 31 23:30:03 2026; Machine Name: berlioz

Debian Bug tracking system

Debbugs is free software and licensed under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2. The current version can be obtained from https://bugs.debian.org/debbugs-source/.

Copyright © 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson, 2005-2017 Don Armstrong, and many other contributors.