Issue #20857 has been updated by byroot (Jean Boussier).
This is the repository I am using: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/vondruch/mpb/builds/
Thank you. I went over a dozen or so, and couldn't find any other than ASCIIDoctor for which the failure cause was the change in `Hash#inspect`. e.g. the `puma` one was because of the change in `Backtrace::Location#to_s`: ``` Expected /:in `dummy_error'/ to match " ``` The `rack` one is because of the `base64` extraction, some more are because of compilation issues, etc. So I highly doubt this is causing even the majority of the `127` failures.
Fedora packages don't necessarily follow upstream development at the same speed. Mostly due to maintainers capacity, other times due to compatibility matrix or even due to "it works, don't touch it". So while there are possibly upstream fixes, it is by nature not as straight forward for Fedora.
I know, that's why I'm always puzzled at why distributions are trying to re-package rubygems... Like most of the failure I'm seeing on your CI are things already fixed upstream. But I suppose that's another topic. ---------------------------------------- Bug #20857: Don't change `Hash#inspect` formatting https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20857#change-110313 * Author: vo.x (Vit Ondruch) * Status: Assigned * Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) * ruby -v: ruby 3.4.0dev (2024-10-15 master 3da3cabf98) +PRISM [x86_64-linux] * Backport: 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN, 3.3: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- Testing Ruby 3.4 in Fedora, I just hit issue like this in AsciiDoctor test suite: ~~~ 1) Failure: Minitest::Test::TestExtensions::TestIntegration#test_should_assign_captures_correctly_for_inline_macros [test/extensions_test.rb:1382]: --- expected +++ actual @@ -1,9 +1,9 @@ "target=\"\", attributes={} -target=\"value,key=val\", attributes={1=>\"value\", \"key\"=>\"val\", \"name\"=>\"value\"} -target=\"\", attributes={\"text\"=>\"\"} -target=\"[text]\", attributes={\"text\"=>\"[text]\"} +target=\"value,key=val\", attributes={1 => \"value\", \"key\" => \"val\", \"name\" => \"value\"} +target=\"\", attributes={\"text\" => \"\"} +target=\"[text]\", attributes={\"text\" => \"[text]\"} target=\"target\", attributes={} -target=\"target\", attributes={1=>\"value\", \"key\"=>\"val\", \"name\"=>\"value\"} -target=\"target\", attributes={\"text\"=>\"\"} -target=\"target\", attributes={\"text\"=>\"[text]\"} +target=\"target\", attributes={1 => \"value\", \"key\" => \"val\", \"name\" => \"value\"} +target=\"target\", attributes={\"text\" => \"\"} +target=\"target\", attributes={\"text\" => \"[text]\"} target=\"target\", attributes={}" ~~~ This suggest that `Hash#inspect` formatting was changed and there are additional spaces around hash rocket. Is the space really worth of the troubles? BTW [here](https://github.com/asciidoctor/asciidoctor/issues/4634#issuecomment-24494974...) is AsciiDoctor upstream reaction and I share the sentiment. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/