Issue #20857 has been updated by vo.x (Vit Ondruch). byroot (Jean Boussier) wrote in #note-6:
there have failed to build 127 out of 528 packages.
Could you share the package names and failures? I think it's an important data point.
This is the repository I am using: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/vondruch/mpb/builds/ From there, click on the "Build ID" and then builder-live.log.gz at the bottom page. [This](https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/vondruch/mpb/fedora-rawhi...) would be log for the AsciiDoctor. I hope this is enough, but let me know if something is not as clear as I might think 😇 Please note that this is very much WIP and the repository might significantly change. E.g. working on rubygem-fog-core fix, which might unblock other Fog related packages as well as Vagrant.
Personally as stated on https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20433 I really love this change, and after fixing various applications and libraries, there wasn't any failed test I thought was really legitimate in using `Hash#inspect` to make assertions.
Of course this is going to create quite a bit of churn, so I'd understand if it was reverted or more limited on that basis.
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.
But I don't think the "compatibility" argument is sound, because it doesn't make sense to assume that an API that is meant for debugging (`#inspect`) would guarantee a stable output forever. Otherwise that means we can't ever improve user experience related to it.
---------------------------------------- Bug #20857: Don't change `Hash#inspect` formatting https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20857#change-110312 * 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/