Some tests are failing for puma at least on amd64 and mips64el: Errors & Failures: 1) Failure: TestIntegrationPumactl#test_refork_cluster [/build/reproducible-path/puma-6.4.3/test/test_integration_pumactl.rb:127]: Logs on https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=puma Cheers, Emilio
Hi, Both bugs are about similar issues (tests failures during build for the first one, tests failures during autopkgtest for the second one). Regarding the first one, I could build puma fine in two different environments, so I think that the failures are random. Regarding the second one, it was already known that the failures are random. I'm thus downgrading the severity of both bugs. Regarding the second one, I'm not 100% sure: I thought random failures were not release-critical, but I see that the bug was originally filed as serious, even if it was already about random failures. So feel free to upgrade to serious again! Best, Lucas
Hello. On AWS machines of type m7a.medium and r7a.medium I'm getting a failure rate of 100%, so it's not really "random". Incidentally, those instance types have a single-CPU, but at this point it's not clear yet if that's the condition which triggers the build failure or, for example, the fact that they are overall slower than other instance types, or maybe some other reason. In either case, we don't have a Build-CPU control field to indicate that the package "needs" more than 1 CPU to build successfully, so this is a "secret sauce" that we should try to avoid in a stable release, as it's against the spirit of the DFSG. My suggestion is that you try building the package after booting with GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX="nr_cpus=1" and it you can't reproduce the build failures that way please contact me privately and I will gladly provide a VM to reproduce. If you don't want to debug this, that's ok, but then please disable the flaky tests. Thanks.
Oh, I see that Lucas is speaking as the maintainer in this thread. Could you please build the package on an instance of type m7a.medium or r7a.medium? (This time I don't need to offer a VM :-) Thanks.
Hi, Yes (I was going through Ruby team's RC bugs) I tried with a local KVM virtual machine, with nr_cpus=1, and can confirm that it fails to build in that case. Still, it's probably OK to keep it as severity:important in the context of the trixie release preparation. (or severity:serious + trixie-ignore). There are many other more severe RC bugs to work on unfortunately. Lucas
retitle 1093520 puma: FTBFS: test failures thanks Hello. While it's true that this package seems to fail systematically on single-cpu systems, the failing test in those cases (single-cpu) is this one: TestWebConcurrencyAuto#test_web_concurrency_with_concurrent_ruby_available which is not the error reported by Emilio. I'm therefore restoring the old title and will report the single-cpu failure separately. Thanks.