-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
/
Copy pathqna.yaml
4763 lines (4755 loc) · 196 KB
/
qna.yaml
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
"created_by": |-
Log Detective Team
"document":
"commit": |-
HEAD
"patterns":
- |-
README.md
"repo": |-
https://github.com/fedora-copr/logdetective-taxonomy
"document_outline": |-
Building RPMs
"domain": |-
software
"seed_examples":
- "context": |-
../../src.x11/popdial.c:201:5: warning: old-style function definition [-Wold-style-definition]
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
Warning about old-style code.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
You have to work with upstream and update code to C23 standard.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
The standar for C moved to C23 and the code uses old code that does not work with newer standard.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
Failed to resolve the transaction
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
RPM installation of build dependencies failed.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Please make sure your dependencies are correct in spec file or make sure that the dependencies are build first
and included in the build repositories.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
RPM build dependencies can't be satisfied. Packages checkpolicy and policycoreutils-devel in version 3.8 or
higher are not available.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
No match for argument: checkpolicy >= 3.
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
The checkpolicy package with version 3.8 or higher is not available in available the repositories.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Please make sure your dependencies are correct in spec file or make sure that the dependencies are build first
and included in the build repositories.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
RPM build dependencies can't be satisfied. Packages checkpolicy and policycoreutils-devel in version 3.8 or
higher are not available.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
No match for argument: policycoreutils-devel >= 3.
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
The policycoreutils-devel package with version 3.8 or higher is not available in available the repositories.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Please make sure your dependencies are correct in spec file or make sure that the dependencies are build first
and included in the build repositories.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
RPM build dependencies can't be satisfied. Packages checkpolicy and policycoreutils-devel in version 3.8 or
higher are not available.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
Problem: nothing provides requested (crate(rusqlite/bundled) >= 0.28.0 with crate(rusqlite/bundled) < 0.29.0
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
It shows what searched package must provide. But there is non providing exactly this one.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Comment out feature = bundled for rusqlite dependency.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Fedora rust packages does not provide crate(rusqlite/bundled) crate. But there is package providing
crate(rusqlite), so we need to avoid bundled feature.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
No matching package to install: 'mongo-c-driver-deve
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
Package 'mongo-c-driver-devel' cannot be installed because it's not available in enabled RPM repositories.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
If the dependency is required, you need to provide it to proceed with the build process. If it's not required,
remove it from BuildRequires and update the %build section.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
One of the required build dependencies, 'mongo-c-driver-devel', cannot be installed so the build cannot proceed.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
FileNotFoundError: File "setup.py" not found for legacy projec
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
The script searches for "setup.py" but can't find it, resulting in a FileNotFoundError.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
If using pyproject.toml: Make sure the package uses a pyproject.toml file with the necessary build dependencies
specified for setuptools. The pyproject_buildrequires.py script should then handle dependencies automatically.
Legacy packaging with missing "setup.py": Locate the "setup.py" file within the source code. Ensure the
directory containing "setup.py" is the root of the package being built. If "setup.py" is genuinely missing,
verify if you have the correct source code for the package.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
The error message indicates your RPM build for the python-castor-extractor package failed because it couldn't
find the required build file "setup.py". The pyproject_buildrequires.py script is used by RPM to generate build
dependencies for Python packages. It tries to determine the build tools required by the package based on
pyproject.toml and "setup.py" files. In this case, the script specifically checks for setuptools version 61.2 or
higher (indicated by Handling setuptools>=61.2 from build-system.requires).
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
No match for argument: libgpr-dev
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
Package libgpr-devel is not available in the enabled repositories.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Missing Repository: The package repository you're using might not contain the libgpr-devel package. This could
be due to the specific distribution you're using or the repository configuration. Incorrect Package Name: There
might be a typo in the package name or a version mismatch. Package Availability: The package might not be
available for your specific system architecture or distribution version.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
This error typically arises during package installation or compilation processes, specifically when a package
manager (like DNF) or a build system cannot find the specified development package, libgpr-devel.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
Problem: nothing provides requested (python3dist(setuptools) >= 70 with python3dist(setuptools) < 70.1
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
The part "(python3dist(setuptools) >= 70 with python3dist(setuptools) < 70.1)" specifies a very specific version
range for the setuptools package. It requires a version that is at least 70.0.0 but strictly less than 70.1.0.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Update the dependency constraint to the one available in the distribution and make sure the software works well
with it.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
The error message you're seeing, "nothing provides requested (python3dist(setuptools) >= 70 with
python3dist(setuptools) < 70.1)," indicates a dependency conflict within your Python project. Therefore the RPM
build failed as the build requires can't be satisfied.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": "error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.2uGqIu (%build)\n Bad\
\ exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.2uGqIu \n(%build)"
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
The build failed in %build phase
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Ask upstream to support ppc64le. Temporary workaround is to exclude this architecture: ExcludeArch:
ppc64le
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
The build failed because the code use different type compared to system type. In this case ppc64le.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.kn1qkC (%check)
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
The build failed in %check section.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
You need to add BuildRequires with package that provides this command. In this case: ``` $ rpm -qf
/usr/bin/git git-core-2.47.1-1.fc41.x86_64 ``` You should add to SPEC file: BuildRequires: git-core
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
The test suite needs to run `git` command, but the package that provides this command is not installed.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
error: %changelog entries must start with
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
This is the build error
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Add the changelog manually in the SPEC file
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
The `%changelog` field in the SPEC file is not valid. The possibility of using autochangelogs was introduced
with `rpmautospec`, but it seems it was not reflected here.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
Ran 73 tests in 13.327s
FAILED (errors=1, skipped=5
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
It is a reason why build failed.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Fix the tests so checks in %check secion can pass and build can continue.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Build failed because tests in %check section failed.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.Vd92jf (%check
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
It points out that the error happened in a %check section of a spec file.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Fix the tests so checks in %check secion can pass and build can continue.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Build failed because tests in %check section failed.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": "error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.afkYZL (%check)\n Bad\
\ exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.afkYZL \n(%check)\nChild return code was:\
\ 1"
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
The build failed in %check phase.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
It seems that the test suite is trying to install a plugin. Make sure that it does not require an internet
connection, as all builds are done without an internet connection. Work with upstream on fixing the test suite.
Alternatively, you may temporarily disable the test suite.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
The test suite in %check section failed.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": "WARNING: The found license expression 'AGPL-3' is not a valid SPDX expression.\
\ Inspect the project manually to \nfind the licens"
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
License of the project is not in SPDX format. Please change name of the license based on the SPDX sources.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Seems that the odoo-addon-l10n-es-vat-book project can't be converted to SRPM by pyp2spec application. Please
try pyp2spec locally to debug the issue: pyp2spec odoo-addon-l10n-es-vat-book --fedora-compliant --automode -v
17.0.1.2.0
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Automatic conversion of the odoo-addon-l10n-es-vat-book project by pyp2spec application fails to create SRPM.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
Fatal exception occurred: sdist not found
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
The source distribution archive of the python package can't be found. Seems that the source archive can't be
created.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Seems that the odoo-addon-l10n-es-vat-book project can't be converted to SRPM by pyp2spec application. Please
try pyp2spec locally to debug the issue: pyp2spec odoo-addon-l10n-es-vat-book --fedora-compliant --automode -v
17.0.1.2.0
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Automatic conversion of the odoo-addon-l10n-es-vat-book project by pyp2spec application fails to create SRPM.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
Unable to generate spec for `odoo-addon-l10n-es-vat-book
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
Spec file can't be created by pyp2spec application for project odoo-addon-l10n-es-vat-book.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Seems that the odoo-addon-l10n-es-vat-book project can't be converted to SRPM by pyp2spec application. Please
try pyp2spec locally to debug the issue: pyp2spec odoo-addon-l10n-es-vat-book --fedora-compliant --automode -v
17.0.1.2.0
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Automatic conversion of the odoo-addon-l10n-es-vat-book project by pyp2spec application fails to create SRPM.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
DEBUG: install: cannot stat 'etc/account-serrver.conf-sample': No such file or director
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
Expected file `etc/account-serrver.conf-sample` was not found in its expected location. Name of the file
appears to be a typo.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Fix typo in the file name `account-serrver.conf-sample`.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Name of file `account-serrver.conf-sample` contains a typo. Therefore it cannot be present at the expected
location. Causing build to fail.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
1:dead:beef:cafe:c196' (ED25519) to the list
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
Error encountered while executing RDoc.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Ensure that the `rdoc` package is properly installed and verified before build.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Expected file `/usr/share/gems/gems/rdoc-6.8.0/lib/rdoc/generator/template/darkfish/_sidebar_toggle.rhtml` is
not present. Causing failure during documentation build. This is probably due to incorrectly installed, or
missing`rdoc-6.8.0` gem, which is supposed to provide it.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": "[ERROR] COMPILATION ERROR : \n[INFO] -------------------------------------------------------------\n\
[ERROR] \nerror: release version 1.8 not supporte"
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
Compilation error from `javac` Java compiler. This error indicates that version 1.8 is not supported.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Change value of the `release` attribute to a fitting major version.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Build fail because `1.8` is not a valid value of the release attribute. JDK only allows major versions as
values of the `release` attribute.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": "<internal:/usr/share/rubygems/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb>:85:in\
\ `require': cannot load such file -- \nio/console/size (LoadErro"
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
Required file,`io/console/size` can not be loaded. This is a constituent part of `io/console` gem.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Ensure your Ruby installation is valid, ideally reinstalling it entirely after identifying why wasn't a one of
default gems present.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Default gem `io/console` is not present on the build system. This is a serious issue, as it should be packaged
with the standard Ruby distribution.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": "1:dead:beef:cafe:c19b' (ED25519) to the list of known hosts.\r\n\nYou\
\ can reproduce this build on your computer by \nrunning:\n\n sudo dnf inst"
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
This is an information from Copr buildsystem that this build is taking too long and reach the timeout level.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
When you are submitting a new build you can specify the Timeout. The option is available both in WebUI and CLI
(--timeout) and is specified in seconds.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Copr killed this build because it reached the timeout level. Builds are not allowed to run forever. The default
limit is 5 hours (18000 seconds) but users can increase it up to 30 hours (108000 seconds).
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
make[2]: *** [Makefile:860: all] Error 2
crash build failed
make[1]: *** [Makefile:266: gdb_merge] Error
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
The primary error message indicates a failure in the all target of the Makefile, specifically at line 860. This
suggests that a command or script invoked at that point encountered an error. The subsequent errors in the make
hierarchy point to a broader issue, possibly related to the gdb_merge target. This target might be involved in
merging or processing GDB-related files or configurations.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Missing Dependencies: Ensure that all required dependencies, including system libraries and development
packages, are installed and accessible to the build system. Check if there are specific dependencies for the
aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu target architecture. Configuration Issues: Review the project's configuration files
(e.g., configure, Makefile) to identify any incorrect settings or missing options. Verify that the build system
is correctly configured for the target architecture and platform. Build Script Errors: Examine the build
scripts (e.g., shell scripts, Python scripts) for errors in logic or syntax. Look for any specific errors or
warnings reported during the build process. Compiler or Toolchain Problems: Ensure that the compiler and
toolchain (e.g., GCC, Clang) are correctly installed and configured. Check for any known issues or bugs in the
specific compiler or toolchain version being used.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Target all from Makefile resulted in an error.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": "/usr/bin/ld: /usr/lib64/libicui18n.so: undefined reference to `__cxa_call_terminate@CXXABI_1.3.15'\n\
collect2: \nerror: ld returned 1 exit stat"
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
The linker couldn't find the definition for the symbol __cxa_call_terminate@CXXABI_1.3.15. The error message
specifies the version CXXABI_1.3.15. It's possible that your compiler is expecting a specific version of
libstdc++ that might not be available on your system.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Upgrade C++ Libraries: If possible, update your system's C++ libraries to a version that provides CXXABI_1.3.15
or later. Specify Library Path: If upgrading isn't an option, try adding the path to the specific libstdc++
library version that your compiler expects to the linker search path. This can be achieved through environment
variables like LD_LIBRARY_PATH (for temporary fixes) or linker flags specific to your build system.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
The RPM build failed because the linker couldn't find the definition for the symbol
__cxa_call_terminate@CXXABI_1.3.15. This symbol is part of the C++ exception handling mechanism provided by the
standard C++ library (libstdc++).
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
+ gdb --batch --command=test.gdb python3
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.sfzGCC: line 62: gdb: command not fou
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
This indicates that the gdb command is not found in the system's PATH.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Ensure the gdb package is installed on the build system. Add it via BuildRequires into your specfile.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
gdb debugger is used to analyze the python3 process. However, gdb is not available in the build environment.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
dawglib.c:42:1: warning: old-style function definition [-Wold-style-definition]
42 | PutDAWG (fp, buffer)
| ^~~~~
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
Compiler warning about old style function definition being used in `dawglib.c`. This is not an error by itself,
but a stylistic deficiency.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Verify API of all libraries used as dependencies and adjust your code accordingly, or alter the constraints to
retrieve versions with compatible API. You can also attempt to resolve warnings produced by the compiler, to
improve overall quality of your code.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Build failed due to multiple sever compiler errors. All concerning number of arguments used to call functions.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": "6' (ED25519) to the list of known hosts.\r\n\nYou can reproduce this\
\ build on your computer by running:\n\n sudo dnf"
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
Compiler error, function `ChopNL` is being called with too many arguments.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Verify API of all libraries used as dependencies and adjust your code accordingly, or alter the constraints to
retrieve versions with compatible API. You can also attempt to resolve warnings produced by the compiler, to
improve overall quality of your code.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Build failed due to multiple sever compiler errors. All concerning number of arguments used to call functions.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file tests/unit/customizations/cloudtrail/test_validation.py.rej
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
This is the output of the patch command. It indicates that it failed.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
It is necessary to examine the patch that failed to apply and fix it - in this case the changes have been
already applied upstream so the patch could be simply removed.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
The build failed because (at least) one of the patches failed to be applied.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.3GevrQ (%prep
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
This is a line from rpmbuild that indicates that the build failed during %prep section execution.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
It is necessary to examine the patch that failed to apply and fix it - in this case the changes have been
already applied upstream so the patch could be simply removed.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
The build failed because (at least) one of the patches failed to be applied.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
HINT: you may need to install a package such as libpipewire-0.3, libpipewire-0.3-dev or libpipewire-0.3-deve
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
Indication pipewire is needed somewhere
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Install pipewire-devel?
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
The system library `libpipewire-0.3` required by crate `libspa-sys` was not found.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
CMake Error: Not a file: /builddir/build/SOURCES/Release.cma
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
It indicates that a cache file is missing for CMake.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
List the Release.cmake file as a source in the spec file for it to be part of the source RPM (SRPM):
Source1009: Release.cmake
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
I forgot to to list the `Release.cmake` cache as a source in the spec file. If you forgot this, it will not be
included in the source RPM (SRPM) from which the RPM will be built.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": "error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.1C134u (%build)\n Bad\
\ exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.1C134u \n(%build)"
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
The build failed during `%build` phase.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
The solution is to add ``` BuildRequires: qt6-qtbase-private-devel ``` to the SPEC file.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
The build requires qtbase-private devel files, but it is not specified as BuildRequires.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": "54.163.42.1' (ED25519) to the list of known hosts.\r\n\nYou can reproduce\
\ this build on your computer by running:\n\n\n sudo dnf instal"
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
This is a warning about license format. While it is important that all packages follow certain conventions, this
is not the cause of failed build.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Ensure presence of sources before build commences.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
The source tarball, sdist, was not present during build.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
Fatal exception occurred: sdist not foun
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
This exception is reason for the build failure. Without sdist, the source tarball, there is nothing to build and
therefore nothing to package.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Ensure presence of sources before build commences.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
The source tarball, sdist, was not present during build.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": "stderr: \n\nUnable to generate spec for `dolphind"
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
Final error, stating that there was no way to generate spec for the package.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Ensure presence of sources before build commences.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
The source tarball, sdist, was not present during build.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
Executing(%check): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.E7U0x
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
This indicates that rpmbuild started %check section of SPEC file.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
You should investigate the reason of the failure of unit test suite and work with upstream on fixing these
tests. As a quick workaround you may disable the tests. Either by commenting %check section or disabling the
specific test using `%pytest -k "not test_pure_equal"`. But be aware that building package with failing test
suite can lead to broken software.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
The build fails because of the failed test suite. The problem is that Windows path for wcmatch and Posix path or
wcmatch does not differ while the test claims it should be different.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
tests/test_pathlib.py::TestComparisons::test_pure_equal FAILED [ 96%
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
This indicates that test TestComparisons::test_pure_equal failed.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
You should investigate the reason of the failure of unit test suite and work with upstream on fixing these
tests. As a quick workaround you may disable the tests. Either by commenting %check section or disabling the
specific test using `%pytest -k "not test_pure_equal"`. But be aware that building package with failing test
suite can lead to broken software.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
The build fails because of the failed test suite. The problem is that Windows path for wcmatch and Posix path or
wcmatch does not differ while the test claims it should be different.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
srpm_build_method': 'rpkg',
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
This seems like a build with `rpkg-util`.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Start using the DistGit method for building your SRPMs.
https://docs.pagure.org/copr.copr/user_documentation.html#dist-git-method
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Improperly picked source method.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
{'clone_url': 'https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Guard
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
But `clone_url` points at Fedora DistGit (the official one). This seems wrong, you would typically use the
DistGit source method instead of rpkg.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Start using the DistGit method for building your SRPMs.
https://docs.pagure.org/copr.copr/user_documentation.html#dist-git-method
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Improperly picked source method.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
Executing(%check): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.1fyr
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
The failure happens in the %check section.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Fix the testsuite. This could mean anything; fixing the test-case (if broken) or fixing the code (so the test-
case reveals a real bug).
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Because the Python testsuite, triggered by CMake testsuite, executed in %check phase failed.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
Errors while running CTest
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
The command that fails with non-zero exit status is `ctest`, so this is a CMake-based test-suite failure.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Fix the testsuite. This could mean anything; fixing the test-case (if broken) or fixing the code (so the test-
case reveals a real bug).
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Because the Python testsuite, triggered by CMake testsuite, executed in %check phase failed.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": "1: Test command: /usr/bin/python3 \"-m\" \"unittest\" \"discover\" \"\
-s\" \"tests\" \"-t\" \n\"/builddir/build/BUILD/dnf-4.18.2\""
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
The first-cmake test failed, which is a transitive call to Python unittests.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Fix the testsuite. This could mean anything; fixing the test-case (if broken) or fixing the code (so the test-
case reveals a real bug).
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Because the Python testsuite, triggered by CMake testsuite, executed in %check phase failed.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
No match for argument: elpa-mpich-devel >= 2018.05.001
No match for argument: elpa-openmpi-devel >= 2018.05.001
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
Package was retired
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Update the spec file to remove/update that support or try to takeover the package maintenance again.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Retired package was used
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
cc1: all warnings being treated as erro
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
All warnings found by gcc are treated as errors and need to be resolved.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Fix all warnings which gcc treats as errors or don't compile your software with the option `-Werror`.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
The gcc option `-Werror` makes all warnings into errors.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
No match for argument: python3dist(ansible-compat) >= 4.1.
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
Requirement `: python3dist(ansible-compat) >= 4.1.11` cannot be fulfilled. It means there is no package in the
repositories with this version.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Change dependencies of your package if the package is available in a different version. If you require this
particular version, work with the maintainer of ansible-compat to build the required version of the package.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Build dependencies for this package cannot be installed.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": "/usr/bin/copr-rpmbuild --verbose --drop-resultdir --srpm --task-url\
\ \nhttps://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/backend/get-srpm-build-task/762335"
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
This indicates that we are building SRC.RPM.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
You have several options: 1) You can put in the Makefile a line `dnf install cargo tar` 2) Or you can switch
in Copr build system to Custom method when you can manually call `dnf install` and then `make srpm`.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
You do not have `cargo` and `tar` binaries installed in the build system when you build the SRC.RPM.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
make srpm -C /mnt/workdir-ai9uownn/nmstat
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
You are running `make srpm` to build a tarball.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
You have several options: 1) You can put in the Makefile a line `dnf install cargo tar` 2) Or you can switch
in Copr build system to Custom method when you can manually call `dnf install` and then `make srpm`.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
You do not have `cargo` and `tar` binaries installed in the build system when you build the SRC.RPM.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
WARNING: DNF4 command failed, retrying, attempt #2, sleeping 10
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
The DNF command for updating metadata has failed. It is trying to retry.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Try to verify available repositories. However, most probably there is a failure on the official CentOS Stream 10
which contains 'baseos' repository.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Metadata of the 'baseos' repository were downloaded but checksum verification has failed.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": "dict-generate.cpp:1006:32: note: \u2018uint64_t\u2019 is defined in\
\ header \u2018<cstdint>\u2019; this is probably fixable by adding\n \u2018#include\
\ <cstdint>\u2019"
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
You are missing a type that is defined in cstdint header file.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
You need to patch the source and add this line to includes: #include <cstdint> You should notify upstream
about this.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
In C++11 there is new standard header file `cstdint` that includes some definitions that was previously in
stdint.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": "error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.crCZP8 (%check)\n Bad\
\ exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.crCZP8 \n(%check)\nChild return code was:\
\ 1"
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
The build failed in %check section.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
You can skip the %check section for flatpak build by adding this condition: %if ! 0%{?flatpak} %check ...
%endif
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Systemd unit files are in this case of Flatpak build irrelevant.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
-Ddomain_prefix=org.gnome.FlatpakAp
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
This is a Flatpak build.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
You can skip the %check section for flatpak build by adding this condition: %if ! 0%{?flatpak} %check ...
%endif
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Systemd unit files are in this case of Flatpak build irrelevant.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
No match for argument: bash-completion-dev
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
This snippet lists the unavailable package.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Update the spec file to list the correct and available build requirements.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
The build BuildRequires a package that doesn't exist.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
error: patch failed: devices/vector/gdevtxtw.c:2059
Applying patch devices/vector/gdevtxtw.c with 1 reject...
Rejected hunk #1
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
It shows that patch application failed.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Check that the patch has been upstreamed. If yes: Remove the patch line from spec and the patch from dist-git.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
Patch application failed because (in this case) the patch had been upstreamed.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
Problem: nothing provides requested (crate(condtype/default) >= 1.3.0 with crate(condtype/default) < 2.0.0~)
You can try to add to command lin
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
cargo crate may not have been added to fedora/copr yet
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
run rust2rpm condtype and upload to spec to same copr project
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
unsatisfied dependencies
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
openssl-libs x86_64 1:3.1.4-1.fc40 fedora 7.8 Mi
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
This line indicate that openssl 3.1.4 is used.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
You need to add: BuildRequires: gdm-devel to your SPEC file. To be sure you can run command: `dnf provides
'*/gdm-choice-list-pam-extension.h'` to find which package contains the required file.
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
You are missing the required header file `gdm-choice-list-pam-extension.h`. The file is likely provided by
package `gdm-devel`.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
Run-time dependency libarchive found: NO (tried pkgconfig)
meson.build:1416:13: ERROR: Dependency "libarchive"
not found, tried pkgconfi
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
The meson build script requires `libarchive` to be present.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
You need to add to the SPEC file: BuildRequires: libarchive-devel
"question": |-
How can I resolve the issue?
- "answer": |-
The required dependency `libarchive` is missing.
"question": |-
What is the reason the build has failed?
- "context": |-
location searched: directory source `/usr/share/cargo/registry` (which is replacing registry `crates-io`)
"questions_and_answers":
- "answer": |-
It is the chunk that populates the local registry with what should be all the Rust packages required to build
this package.
"question": |-
Explain log snippets from an RPM build.
- "answer": |-
Currently, the only way to fix the issue is to declare a workspace table in the upstream package's Cargo.toml
file and to add both the main package and the smaller package to the members table of the workspace table.