fedora-copr/log_detective_qna huggingface dataset:
Given following log snippets, their explanation, and nothing else, explain what failure, if any, occurred during build of this package.

  Snippets are in a format of [X] : [Y], where [X] is a log snippet, and [Y] is the explanation.

  Snippets are delimited with '================'.

  Drawing on information from all snippets, provide a concise explanation of the issue and recommend a solution.

  Explanation of the issue, and recommended solution, should take a handful of sentences.

  Snippets:

  [error: Bad file: /builddir/build/SOURCES/fping-a3f4c573bfd1ddfc71d2fa672f51c41047473a53.tar.gz: No such file or directory
    Bad file: /builddir/build/SOURCES/fping-a3f4c573bfd1ddfc71d2fa672f51c41047473a53.tar.gz: No such file or directory]: [The RPM source cannot be found.]


Answer: Issue: The source you defined in your RPM spec file (likely as a Source0) cannot be located.
Resolution: Fix the name of the source you defined in your spec file to match the actual source archive.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
error: Bad file: /builddir/build/SOURCES/fping-a3f4c573bfd1ddfc71d2fa672f51c41047473a53.tar.gz: No such file or directory
    Bad file: /builddir/build/SOURCES/fping-a3f4c573bfd1ddfc71d2fa672f51c41047473a53.tar.gz: No such file or directory

Answer: The RPM source cannot be found.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 

ok 70 - empty author ident
# failed 1 among 70 test(

Answer: Sanity check result which failed.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 

error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.ctMmng (%chec

Answer: It shows the reason of the failure.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 

ERROR: Command failed: 
 # /usr/bin/systemd-nspawn -q -M 9a503df6385d4901b87ed890f278e3d5 -D /var/lib/mock/fedora-39-x86_64-1710410160.968367/root -a -u mockbuild --capability=cap_ipc_lock --rlimit=RLIMIT_NOFILE=10240 --capability=cap_ipc_lock --bind=/tmp/mock-resolv.pyot_dqy:/etc/resolv.conf --bind=/dev/btrfs-control --bind=/dev/mapper/control --bind=/dev/fuse --bind=/dev/loop-control --bind=/dev/loop0 --bind=/dev/loop1 --bind=/dev/loop2 --bind=/dev/loop3 --bind=/dev/loop4 --bind=/dev/loop5 --bind=/dev/loop6 --bind=/dev/loop7 --bind=/dev/loop8 --bind=/dev/loop9 --bind=/dev/loop10 --bind=/dev/loop11 --console=pipe --setenv=TERM=vt100 --setenv=SHELL=/bin/bash --setenv=HOME=/builddir --setenv=HOSTNAME=mock --setenv=PATH=/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/sbin '--setenv=PROMPT_COMMAND=printf "\033]0;<mock-chroot>\007"' '--setenv=PS1=<mock-chroot> \s-\v\$ ' --setenv=LANG=C.UTF-8 --resolv-conf=off bash --login -c '/usr/bin/rpmbuild -bb  --target x86_64 --nodeps /builddir/build/originals/git-filter-repo.spec

Answer: It shows that a specific command "systemd-nspawn" failed.
Given following log snippets, their explanation, and nothing else, explain what failure, if any, occurred during build of this package.

  Snippets are in a format of [X] : [Y], where [X] is a log snippet, and [Y] is the explanation.

  Snippets are delimited with '================'.

  Drawing on information from all snippets, provide a concise explanation of the issue and recommend a solution.

  Explanation of the issue, and recommended solution, should take a handful of sentences.

  Snippets:

  [Failed to resolve the transaction:
Package "coreutils-9.5-11.fc42.aarch64" is already installed.
Package "pkgconf-pkg-config-2.3.0-1.fc42.aarch64" is already installed.
Package "sed-4.9-3.fc41.aarch64" is already installed.
Problem: cannot install both gcc-15.0.0-0.2.fc42.aarch64 from https_dmalcolm_fedorapeople_org_gcc_gcc_15_mass_prebuild_arch and gcc-14.2.1-6.fc42.aarch64 from fedora
  - package libtool-2.5.4-1.fc42.aarch64 from fedora requires gcc(major) = 14, but none of the providers can be installed
  - cannot install the best candidate for the job
  - conflicting requests
You can try to add to command line:
  --no-best to not limit the transaction to the best candidates]: [This is a DNF error message. Requested package `gcc-15.0.0-0.2.fc42.aarch64` has a dependency on `gcc(major) = 14`, but that isn't available.]


Answer: Issue: One of the required packages can not be installed due to missing second order dependency.
Resolution: Ensure that all direct, and indirect, dependencies are available before build.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
Failed to resolve the transaction:
Package "coreutils-9.5-11.fc42.aarch64" is already installed.
Package "pkgconf-pkg-config-2.3.0-1.fc42.aarch64" is already installed.
Package "sed-4.9-3.fc41.aarch64" is already installed.
Problem: cannot install both gcc-15.0.0-0.2.fc42.aarch64 from https_dmalcolm_fedorapeople_org_gcc_gcc_15_mass_prebuild_arch and gcc-14.2.1-6.fc42.aarch64 from fedora
  - package libtool-2.5.4-1.fc42.aarch64 from fedora requires gcc(major) = 14, but none of the providers can be installed
  - cannot install the best candidate for the job
  - conflicting requests
You can try to add to command line:
  --no-best to not limit the transaction to the best candidates

Answer: This is a DNF error message. Requested package `gcc-15.0.0-0.2.fc42.aarch64` has a dependency on `gcc(major) = 14`, but that isn't available.
Given following log snippets, their explanation, and nothing else, explain what failure, if any, occurred during build of this package.

  Snippets are in a format of [X] : [Y], where [X] is a log snippet, and [Y] is the explanation.

  Snippets are delimited with '================'.

  Drawing on information from all snippets, provide a concise explanation of the issue and recommend a solution.

  Explanation of the issue, and recommended solution, should take a handful of sentences.

  Snippets:

  [ERROR:  Error installing ./bindings/ruby/openwsman-2.8.1.gem:
	ERROR: Failed to build gem native extension.]: [It show the main reason why the build failed.]
=============
[checking for wsman_create_doc() in -lwsman... no
Cannot find wsman_create_doc() in libwsman
Is openwsman-devel installed ?
*** extconf.rb failed ***
Could not create Makefile due to some reason, probably lack of necessary
libraries and/or headers.  Check the mkmf.log file for more details.]: [It shows more detailed info about build failure.]


Answer: Issue: The build failed due to fail to build gem native extension. When building gem native extension the Makefile for it couldn't be created because of fail check for wsman_create_doc() function in libwsman library.
Resolution: Install required library prior the build (add it to BuildRequires of the spec file) or if it was built previously during the build of the package, make it available exporting the path to it through LIBRARY_PATH and LD_LIBRARY_PATH path variables prior gem native extension build.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
ERROR:  Error installing ./bindings/ruby/openwsman-2.8.1.gem:
	ERROR: Failed to build gem native extension.

Answer: It show the main reason why the build failed.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
checking for wsman_create_doc() in -lwsman... no
Cannot find wsman_create_doc() in libwsman
Is openwsman-devel installed ?
*** extconf.rb failed ***
Could not create Makefile due to some reason, probably lack of necessary
libraries and/or headers.  Check the mkmf.log file for more details.

Answer: It shows more detailed info about build failure.
Given following log snippets, their explanation, and nothing else, explain what failure, if any, occurred during build of this package.

  Snippets are in a format of [X] : [Y], where [X] is a log snippet, and [Y] is the explanation.

  Snippets are delimited with '================'.

  Drawing on information from all snippets, provide a concise explanation of the issue and recommend a solution.

  Explanation of the issue, and recommended solution, should take a handful of sentences.

  Snippets:

  [error: File not found: /home/rhack-lqoij/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/treehouse-release-1.0-1.noarch/etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-TREEHOUSE
error: File not found: /home/rhack-lqoij/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/treehouse-release-1.0-1.noarch/etc/yum.repos.d/treehouse.repo

RPM build errors:
    File not found: /home/rhack-lqoij/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/treehouse-release-1.0-1.noarch/etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-TREEHOUSE
    File not found: /home/rhack-lqoij/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/treehouse-release-1.0-1.noarch/etc/yum.repos.d/treehouse.repo]: [Contains main issue.]


Answer: Issue: Empty %install section so the build root is empty
Resolution: Change your %install section:
install -D -m 644 %{S:0} %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/yum.repos.d/treehouse.repo
install -D -m 644 %{S:1} %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-TREEHOUSE
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
error: File not found: /home/rhack-lqoij/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/treehouse-release-1.0-1.noarch/etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-TREEHOUSE
error: File not found: /home/rhack-lqoij/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/treehouse-release-1.0-1.noarch/etc/yum.repos.d/treehouse.repo

RPM build errors:
    File not found: /home/rhack-lqoij/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/treehouse-release-1.0-1.noarch/etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-TREEHOUSE
    File not found: /home/rhack-lqoij/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/treehouse-release-1.0-1.noarch/etc/yum.repos.d/treehouse.repo

Answer: Contains main issue.
Given following log snippets, their explanation, and nothing else, explain what failure, if any, occurred during build of this package.

  Snippets are in a format of [X] : [Y], where [X] is a log snippet, and [Y] is the explanation.

  Snippets are delimited with '================'.

  Drawing on information from all snippets, provide a concise explanation of the issue and recommend a solution.

  Explanation of the issue, and recommended solution, should take a handful of sentences.

  Snippets:

  [Problem: cannot install the best candidate for the job
  - nothing provides (python3.14dist(orderly-set) >= 5.2.2 with python3.14dist(orderly-set) < 5.3) needed by python3-deepdiff-8.0.1-2.fc43.noarch from copr_base]: [python3-deepdiff cannot be installed, because it requires python3-orderly-set (here defined with its virtual provide python3.14dist(orderly-set)) at least in version 5.2.2 and lower than 5.3. There is apparently no such version in the repository]


Answer: Issue: poetry needs python3-deepdiff to build. python3-deepdiff cannot be installed, because there is not a required version of python3-orderly-set. The repository either has a lower version of python3-orderly-set or a higher one.
Resolution: If there is a lower version of python3-orderly-set in the repository, check whether there is a new version upstream and consider updating it to meet the requirements. If there is a higher version of python3-orderly-set in the repository, try to update python3-deepdiff to a version that already supports the newer version of python3-orderly-set or research ways to fix python3-deepdiff so that it works with the newer version of python3-orderly-set, either in Fedora or upstream. When python3-deepdiff is installable, the build of poetry can be retried again.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
Problem: cannot install the best candidate for the job
  - nothing provides (python3.14dist(orderly-set) >= 5.2.2 with python3.14dist(orderly-set) < 5.3) needed by python3-deepdiff-8.0.1-2.fc43.noarch from copr_base

Answer: python3-deepdiff cannot be installed, because it requires python3-orderly-set (here defined with its virtual provide python3.14dist(orderly-set)) at least in version 5.2.2 and lower than 5.3. There is apparently no such version in the repository
Given following log snippets, their explanation, and nothing else, explain what failure, if any, occurred during build of this package.

  Snippets are in a format of [X] : [Y], where [X] is a log snippet, and [Y] is the explanation.

  Snippets are delimited with '================'.

  Drawing on information from all snippets, provide a concise explanation of the issue and recommend a solution.

  Explanation of the issue, and recommended solution, should take a handful of sentences.

  Snippets:

  [Executing(%prep): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.djl1SM]: [issue in prep section]
=============
[/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.djl1SM: line 41: cd: ka_GE-0.1: No such file or directory]: [shows the exact reason for failure]


Answer: Issue: cd tries to open a non-existent directory.
Resolution: fix the path that should be used by cd
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
Executing(%prep): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.djl1SM

Answer: issue in prep section
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.djl1SM: line 41: cd: ka_GE-0.1: No such file or directory

Answer: shows the exact reason for failure
Given following log snippets, their explanation, and nothing else, explain what failure, if any, occurred during build of this package.

  Snippets are in a format of [X] : [Y], where [X] is a log snippet, and [Y] is the explanation.

  Snippets are delimited with '================'.

  Drawing on information from all snippets, provide a concise explanation of the issue and recommend a solution.

  Explanation of the issue, and recommended solution, should take a handful of sentences.

  Snippets:

  [DEBUG util.py:459:  Failed to resolve the transaction:]: [This indicates that build dependencies couldn't be installed correctly.]
=============
[DEBUG util.py:459:  No match for argument: python3dist(certifi) >= 2025.1.31]: [This shows which exact package couldn't be installed.]


Answer: Issue: A build dependency package which matches "python3dist(certifi) >= 2025.1.31" couldn't be installed.
Resolution: Look whether this is a temporary failure, caused e.g. by a network issue. If it's not a temporary failure, verify that the dependency is listed correctly (e.g. spelled correctly, with a correct version, etc). If all of that it correct, you need to either remove the build dependency (if it's not included in system repositories, and your package can be built without it), replace it with another dependency that satisfies source code requirements, or add the missing dependency package to the repository before running the build again.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
DEBUG util.py:459:  Failed to resolve the transaction:

Answer: This indicates that build dependencies couldn't be installed correctly.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
DEBUG util.py:459:  No match for argument: python3dist(certifi) >= 2025.1.31

Answer: This shows which exact package couldn't be installed.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
/builddir/build/BUILD/dnf5-5.2.13.0/libdnf5/repo/config_repo.cpp:65:84: error: âlibdnf5::OptionNumber<unsigned int>& libdnf5::ConfigMain::get_retries_option()â is deprecated: The option does nothing [-Werror=deprecated-declarations]
   65 |     OptionChild<OptionNumber<std::uint32_t>> retries{main_config.get_retries_option()};
      |                                                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~
In file included from /builddir/build/BUILD/dnf5-5.2.13.0/include/libdnf5/repo/config_repo.hpp:23,
                 from /builddir/build/BUILD/dnf5-5.2.13.0/libdnf5/repo/config_repo.cpp:20:
/builddir/build/BUILD/dnf5-5.2.13.0/include/libdnf5/conf/config_main.hpp:228:77: note: declared here
  228 |     [[deprecated("The option does nothing")]] OptionNumber<std::uint32_t> & get_retries_option();
      |                                                                             ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/builddir/build/BUILD/dnf5-5.2.13.0/libdnf5/repo/config_repo.cpp:84:69: error: âlibdnf5::OptionBool& libdnf5::ConfigMain::get_deltarpm_option()â is deprecated: The option does nothing [-Werror=deprecated-declarations]
   84 |     OptionChild<OptionBool> deltarpm{main_config.get_deltarpm_option()};
      |                                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~
/builddir/build/BUILD/dnf5-5.2.13.0/include/libdnf5/conf/config_main.hpp:306:60: note: declared here
  306 |     [[deprecated("The option does nothing")]] OptionBool & get_deltarpm_option();
      |                                                            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/builddir/build/BUILD/dnf5-5.2.13.0/libdnf5/repo/config_repo.cpp:85:108: error: âlibdnf5::OptionNumber<unsigned int>& libdnf5::ConfigMain::get_deltarpm_percentage_option()â is deprecated: The option does nothing [-Werror=deprecated-declarations]
   85 |     OptionChild<OptionNumber<std::uint32_t>> deltarpm_percentage{main_config.get_deltarpm_percentage_option()};
      |                                                                  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~
/builddir/build/BUILD/dnf5-5.2.13.0/include/libdnf5/conf/config_main.hpp:310:77: note: declared here
  310 |     [[deprecated("The option does nothing")]] OptionNumber<std::uint32_t> & get_deltarpm_percentage_option();
      |                                                                             ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Answer: It shows methods that are deprecated which produces errors.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
cc1plus: all warnings being treated as errors

Answer: The deprecated warnings could normally be ignored but since the build is configured to treat all warnings as errors it fails.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.4JLmug (%build)
    Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.4JLmug (%build)
RPM build errors:
Child return code was: 1


Answer: The build failed during %build phase.
Given following log snippets, their explanation, and nothing else, explain what failure, if any, occurred during build of this package.

  Snippets are in a format of [X] : [Y], where [X] is a log snippet, and [Y] is the explanation.

  Snippets are delimited with '================'.

  Drawing on information from all snippets, provide a concise explanation of the issue and recommend a solution.

  Explanation of the issue, and recommended solution, should take a handful of sentences.

  Snippets:

  [No matching package to install: 'pkgconfig(libei-1.0) >= 0.99.1'
Not all dependencies satisfied
Error: Some packages could not be found]: [Point that describes dependencies that failed to install.]


Answer: Issue: There wasn't the required version present in the repositories
Resolution: Adjust the BuildRequired version, based on whats available in RHEL 9
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
No matching package to install: 'pkgconfig(libei-1.0) >= 0.99.1'
Not all dependencies satisfied
Error: Some packages could not be found

Answer: Point that describes dependencies that failed to install.
Given following log snippets, their explanation, and nothing else, explain what failure, if any, occurred during build of this package.

  Snippets are in a format of [X] : [Y], where [X] is a log snippet, and [Y] is the explanation.

  Snippets are delimited with '================'.

  Drawing on information from all snippets, provide a concise explanation of the issue and recommend a solution.

  Explanation of the issue, and recommended solution, should take a handful of sentences.

  Snippets:

  [
+ scl enable '%{scl}' -
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.KbI8rW: line 33: scl: command not fou]: [The command 'scl' was not found]


Answer: Issue: Missing utility or script
Resolution: Provide the command 'scl'
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 

+ scl enable '%{scl}' -
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.KbI8rW: line 33: scl: command not fou

Answer: The command 'scl' was not found
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 

Executing(%check): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.1fyr

Answer: The failure happens in the %check section.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
Errors while running CTest

Answer: The command that fails with non-zero exit status is `ctest`, so this is a CMake-based test-suite failure.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
1: Test command: /usr/bin/python3 "-m" "unittest" "discover" "-s" "tests" "-t" "/builddir/build/BUILD/dnf-4.18.2"

Answer: The first-cmake test failed, which is a transitive call to Python unittests.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
1: ....History database cannot be created, using in-memory database instead: SQLite error on "/tmp/tests/history.sqlite": Open failed: unable to open database file
1: ......History database cannot be created, using in-memory database instead: SQLite error on "/tmp/tests/history.sqlite": Open failed: unable to open database file
1: E..History database cannot be created, using in-memory database instead: SQLite error on "/tmp/tests/history.sqlite": Open failed: unable to open database file
1: .History database cannot be created, using in-memory database instead: SQLite error on "/tmp/tests/history.sqlite": Open failed: unable to open database file
1: .History database cannot be created, using in-memory database instead: SQLite error on "/tmp/tests/history.sqlite": Open failed: unable to open database file
1: ...History database cannot be created, using in-memory database instead: SQLite error on "/tmp/tests/history.sqlite": Open failed: unable to open database file
1: .History database cannot be created, using in-memory database instead: SQLite error on "/tmp/tests/history.sqlite": Open failed: unable to open database file
1: .History database cannot be created, using in-memory database instead: SQLite error on "/tmp/tests/history.sqlite": Open failed: unable to open database file

Answer: At least one of the python test-cases failed.  See the `E` (meaning error).
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
1: ERROR: test_do_transaction (tests.api.test_dnf_base.DnfBaseApiTest.test_do_transaction)
1: ----------------------------------------------------------------------
1: Traceback (most recent call last):
1:   File "/builddir/build/BUILD/dnf-4.18.2/tests/api/test_dnf_base.py", line 174, in test_do_transaction
1:     self.base.do_transaction(display=None)
1:   File "/builddir/build/BUILD/dnf-4.18.2/dnf/base.py", line 951, in do_transaction
1:     self._moduleContainer.save()
1:   File "/usr/lib64/python3.12/site-packages/libdnf/module.py", line 1241, in save
1:     return _module.ModulePackageContainer_save(self)
1:            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1: libdnf._error.Error: Failed to create directory "/etc/dnf/modules.d": 13 - Permission denied

Answer: Here you can see the actual test failure.
Given following log snippets, their explanation, and nothing else, explain what failure, if any, occurred during build of this package.

  Snippets are in a format of [X] : [Y], where [X] is a log snippet, and [Y] is the explanation.

  Snippets are delimited with '================'.

  Drawing on information from all snippets, provide a concise explanation of the issue and recommend a solution.

  Explanation of the issue, and recommended solution, should take a handful of sentences.

  Snippets:

  [Problem: nothing provides requested (python3dist(botocore) < 1.39~~ with python3dist(botocore) >= 1.38.1)
]: [Required package is not present in repository]


Answer: Issue: Some of the dependencies are missing from repositories
Resolution: python3-botocore to cope or fedora repositories
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
Problem: nothing provides requested (python3dist(botocore) < 1.39~~ with python3dist(botocore) >= 1.38.1)


Answer: Required package is not present in repository
Given following log snippets, their explanation, and nothing else, explain what failure, if any, occurred during build of this package.

  Snippets are in a format of [X] : [Y], where [X] is a log snippet, and [Y] is the explanation.

  Snippets are delimited with '================'.

  Drawing on information from all snippets, provide a concise explanation of the issue and recommend a solution.

  Explanation of the issue, and recommended solution, should take a handful of sentences.

  Snippets:

  [Could not import extension sphinx_autodoc_typehints (exception: No module named 'sphinx_autodoc_typehints')]: [Missing import for python]


Answer: Issue: Dependency python3-sphinx-autodoc-typehints was missing
Resolution: BuildRequires:  python3-sphinx-autodoc-typehints
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
Could not import extension sphinx_autodoc_typehints (exception: No module named 'sphinx_autodoc_typehints')

Answer: Missing import for python
Given following log snippets, their explanation, and nothing else, explain what failure, if any, occurred during build of this package.

  Snippets are in a format of [X] : [Y], where [X] is a log snippet, and [Y] is the explanation.

  Snippets are delimited with '================'.

  Drawing on information from all snippets, provide a concise explanation of the issue and recommend a solution.

  Explanation of the issue, and recommended solution, should take a handful of sentences.

  Snippets:

  [error: File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/fr/man5/*
error: File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/pl/man3/*
error: File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/pt_BR/man5/*
error: File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/sv/man3/*]: [First block of error reports that mention missing translated manual page files.]
=============
[error: File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/zh_CN/man3/*
error: File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/zh_CN/man5/*]: [Second block of error reports that mention missing translated manual page files.]
=============
[File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/fr/man5/*
    File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/pl/man3/*
    File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/pt_BR/man5/*
    File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/sv/man3/*
    File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/sv/man5/*
    File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/zh_CN/man3/*
    File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/zh_CN/man5/*]: [Third block of error reports that mention missing translated manual page files.]


Answer: Issue: The new version of package that we're rebasing to doesn't provide several translated manual page files for some languages. The directories that used to contain the translated manpage files are now empty.
Resolution: In %install section of spec file, all the empty directories need to be removed with 'rm' command from buildroot.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
error: File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/fr/man5/*
error: File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/pl/man3/*
error: File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/pt_BR/man5/*
error: File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/sv/man3/*

Answer: First block of error reports that mention missing translated manual page files.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
error: File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/zh_CN/man3/*
error: File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/zh_CN/man5/*

Answer: Second block of error reports that mention missing translated manual page files.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/fr/man5/*
    File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/pl/man3/*
    File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/pt_BR/man5/*
    File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/sv/man3/*
    File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/sv/man5/*
    File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/zh_CN/man3/*
    File not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/procps-ng-4.0.5-build/BUILDROOT/usr/share/man/zh_CN/man5/*

Answer: Third block of error reports that mention missing translated manual page files.
Given following log snippets, their explanation, and nothing else, explain what failure, if any, occurred during build of this package.

  Snippets are in a format of [X] : [Y], where [X] is a log snippet, and [Y] is the explanation.

  Snippets are delimited with '================'.

  Drawing on information from all snippets, provide a concise explanation of the issue and recommend a solution.

  Explanation of the issue, and recommended solution, should take a handful of sentences.

  Snippets:

  [===============================================
   guestfs-tools 1.52.0: bash/test-suite.log
===============================================
# TOTAL: 1
# PASS:  0
# SKIP:  0
# XFAIL: 0
# FAIL:  1
# XPASS: 0
# ERROR: 0
.. contents:: :depth: 2
FAIL: test-complete-in-script.sh]: [It summarizes the tests run on the package, that are failing]


Answer: Issue: The required test suite has failed which caused the RPM build to fail as well
Resolution: The maintainer should build this package locally to view the `bash/test-suite.log` and review the failing tests.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
===============================================
   guestfs-tools 1.52.0: bash/test-suite.log
===============================================
# TOTAL: 1
# PASS:  0
# SKIP:  0
# XFAIL: 0
# FAIL:  1
# XPASS: 0
# ERROR: 0
.. contents:: :depth: 2
FAIL: test-complete-in-script.sh

Answer: It summarizes the tests run on the package, that are failing
Given following log snippets, their explanation, and nothing else, explain what failure, if any, occurred during build of this package.

  Snippets are in a format of [X] : [Y], where [X] is a log snippet, and [Y] is the explanation.

  Snippets are delimited with '================'.

  Drawing on information from all snippets, provide a concise explanation of the issue and recommend a solution.

  Explanation of the issue, and recommended solution, should take a handful of sentences.

  Snippets:

  [EXCEPTION: [Error('Command failed: \n # /usr/bin/systemd-nspawn -q -M 80e669d707c44a65ab2880d683bc7852 -D /var/lib/mock/f41-build-side-85719-49668308-5919190/root -a -u mockbuild --capability=cap_ipc_lock --bind=/tmp/mock-resolv.h8_75ifa:/etc/resolv.conf --bind=/dev/btrfs-control --bind=/dev/mapper/control --bind=/dev/fuse --bind=/dev/loop-control --bind=/dev/loop0 --bind=/dev/loop1 --bind=/dev/loop2 --bind=/dev/loop3 --bind=/dev/loop4 --bind=/dev/loop5 --bind=/dev/loop6 --bind=/dev/loop7 --bind=/dev/loop8 --bind=/dev/loop9 --bind=/dev/loop10 --bind=/dev/loop11 --console=pipe --setenv=TERM=vt100 --setenv=SHELL=/bin/bash --setenv=HOME=/builddir --setenv=HOSTNAME=mock --setenv=PATH=/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/sbin \'--setenv=PROMPT_COMMAND=printf "\\033]0;<mock-chroot>\\007"\' \'--setenv=PS1=<mock-chroot> \\s-\\v\\$ \' --setenv=LANG=C.UTF-8 --resolv-conf=off bash --login -c \'/usr/bin/rpmbuild -bb --noclean --target i686 --nodeps /builddir/build/SPECS/qt5-qtbase.spec\'\n', 1)]]: [Explains that exception happened because command /usr/bin/systemd-nspawn failed]
=============
[Patch #101 (qtbase-5.15.10-fix-missing-qtsan-include.patch):
+ echo 'Patch #101 (qtbase-5.15.10-fix-missing-qtsan-include.patch):'
+ /usr/bin/patch --no-backup-if-mismatch -f -p1 --fuzz=0
patching file include/QtCore/headers.pri
Hunk #1 FAILED at 1]: [Explains that error occured during applying this patch.]


Answer: Issue: Patch #101 (qtbase-5.15.10-fix-missing-qtsan-include.patch) failed.
Resolution: Review qtbase-5.15.10-fix-missing-qtsan-include.patch and fix it.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
EXCEPTION: [Error('Command failed: \n # /usr/bin/systemd-nspawn -q -M 80e669d707c44a65ab2880d683bc7852 -D /var/lib/mock/f41-build-side-85719-49668308-5919190/root -a -u mockbuild --capability=cap_ipc_lock --bind=/tmp/mock-resolv.h8_75ifa:/etc/resolv.conf --bind=/dev/btrfs-control --bind=/dev/mapper/control --bind=/dev/fuse --bind=/dev/loop-control --bind=/dev/loop0 --bind=/dev/loop1 --bind=/dev/loop2 --bind=/dev/loop3 --bind=/dev/loop4 --bind=/dev/loop5 --bind=/dev/loop6 --bind=/dev/loop7 --bind=/dev/loop8 --bind=/dev/loop9 --bind=/dev/loop10 --bind=/dev/loop11 --console=pipe --setenv=TERM=vt100 --setenv=SHELL=/bin/bash --setenv=HOME=/builddir --setenv=HOSTNAME=mock --setenv=PATH=/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/sbin \'--setenv=PROMPT_COMMAND=printf "\\033]0;<mock-chroot>\\007"\' \'--setenv=PS1=<mock-chroot> \\s-\\v\\$ \' --setenv=LANG=C.UTF-8 --resolv-conf=off bash --login -c \'/usr/bin/rpmbuild -bb --noclean --target i686 --nodeps /builddir/build/SPECS/qt5-qtbase.spec\'\n', 1)]

Answer: Explains that exception happened because command /usr/bin/systemd-nspawn failed
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
Patch #101 (qtbase-5.15.10-fix-missing-qtsan-include.patch):
+ echo 'Patch #101 (qtbase-5.15.10-fix-missing-qtsan-include.patch):'
+ /usr/bin/patch --no-backup-if-mismatch -f -p1 --fuzz=0
patching file include/QtCore/headers.pri
Hunk #1 FAILED at 1

Answer: Explains that error occured during applying this patch.
Given following log snippets, their explanation, and nothing else, explain what failure, if any, occurred during build of this package.

  Snippets are in a format of [X] : [Y], where [X] is a log snippet, and [Y] is the explanation.

  Snippets are delimited with '================'.

  Drawing on information from all snippets, provide a concise explanation of the issue and recommend a solution.

  Explanation of the issue, and recommended solution, should take a handful of sentences.

  Snippets:

  [+ /usr/lib/rpm/rpmuncompress /builddir/build/SOURCES/python312.patch
+ /usr/bin/patch -p1 -s --fuzz=0 --no-backup-if-mismatch -f
2 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file awscli/botocore/auth.py.rej
2 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file awscli/botocore/crt/auth.py.rej
1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file awscli/botocore/utils.py.rej
1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file awscli/compat.py.rej
2 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file awscli/customizations/cloudformation/deployer.py.rej
1 out of 3 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file awscli/customizations/cloudtrail/validation.py.rej
2 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file awscli/customizations/codedeploy/push.py.rej
1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file awscli/customizations/datapipeline/__init__.py.rej
1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file awscli/customizations/eks/get_token.py.rej
1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file awscli/customizations/logs/tail.py.rej
2 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file tests/functional/botocore/test_credentials.py.rej
1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file tests/functional/botocore/test_ec2.py.rej
2 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file tests/functional/botocore/test_lex.py.rej
1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file tests/functional/botocore/test_sts.py.rej
4 out of 5 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file tests/unit/botocore/auth/test_signers.py.rej
6 out of 8 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file tests/unit/botocore/test_credentials.py.rej
1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file tests/unit/botocore/test_signers.py.rej
2 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file tests/unit/botocore/test_utils.py.rej
1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file tests/utils/botocore/__init__.py.rej]: [The snippet shows that patch python312.patch does not apply.]


Answer: Issue: Some parts of the patch were rejected.
Resolution: The patch is called python312.patch which indicates that the patch is specific for Python 3.12. Try to adjust the patch or remove it if it is not relevant for Python 3.14 anymore.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
+ /usr/lib/rpm/rpmuncompress /builddir/build/SOURCES/python312.patch
+ /usr/bin/patch -p1 -s --fuzz=0 --no-backup-if-mismatch -f
2 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file awscli/botocore/auth.py.rej
2 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file awscli/botocore/crt/auth.py.rej
1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file awscli/botocore/utils.py.rej
1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file awscli/compat.py.rej
2 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file awscli/customizations/cloudformation/deployer.py.rej
1 out of 3 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file awscli/customizations/cloudtrail/validation.py.rej
2 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file awscli/customizations/codedeploy/push.py.rej
1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file awscli/customizations/datapipeline/__init__.py.rej
1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file awscli/customizations/eks/get_token.py.rej
1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file awscli/customizations/logs/tail.py.rej
2 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file tests/functional/botocore/test_credentials.py.rej
1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file tests/functional/botocore/test_ec2.py.rej
2 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file tests/functional/botocore/test_lex.py.rej
1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file tests/functional/botocore/test_sts.py.rej
4 out of 5 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file tests/unit/botocore/auth/test_signers.py.rej
6 out of 8 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file tests/unit/botocore/test_credentials.py.rej
1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file tests/unit/botocore/test_signers.py.rej
2 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file tests/unit/botocore/test_utils.py.rej
1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file tests/utils/botocore/__init__.py.rej

Answer: The snippet shows that patch python312.patch does not apply.
Given following log snippets, their explanation, and nothing else, explain what failure, if any, occurred during build of this package.

  Snippets are in a format of [X] : [Y], where [X] is a log snippet, and [Y] is the explanation.

  Snippets are delimited with '================'.

  Drawing on information from all snippets, provide a concise explanation of the issue and recommend a solution.

  Explanation of the issue, and recommended solution, should take a handful of sentences.

  Snippets:

  [There was 1 failure:]: [The text after this shows the failed unit test]
=============
[FAILURES!!!
Tests run: 19,  Failures: 1]: [This marks failures in the included test suite]
=============
[error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.3MIvi8 (%check)]: [This shows that there was an error in the %check section, where the test suite is run]


Answer: Issue: The build failed because the integrated test suite failed.
Resolution: The test suite needs to be fixed. This is either a genuine bug in the source code, or it is a bug in the test suite.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
There was 1 failure:

Answer: The text after this shows the failed unit test
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
FAILURES!!!
Tests run: 19,  Failures: 1

Answer: This marks failures in the included test suite
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.3MIvi8 (%check)

Answer: This shows that there was an error in the %check section, where the test suite is run
Given following log snippets, their explanation, and nothing else, explain what failure, if any, occurred during build of this package.

  Snippets are in a format of [X] : [Y], where [X] is a log snippet, and [Y] is the explanation.

  Snippets are delimited with '================'.

  Drawing on information from all snippets, provide a concise explanation of the issue and recommend a solution.

  Explanation of the issue, and recommended solution, should take a handful of sentences.

  Snippets:

  [No match for argument: libsvbonycam]: [Build dependency missing from repositories.]


Answer: Issue: A build dependency was not found in the repositories.
Resolution: Make sure that all listed build dependencies are actually needed and that they are present in the repositories.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
No match for argument: libsvbonycam

Answer: Build dependency missing from repositories.
Given following log snippets, their explanation, and nothing else, explain what failure, if any, occurred during build of this package.

  Snippets are in a format of [X] : [Y], where [X] is a log snippet, and [Y] is the explanation.

  Snippets are delimited with '================'.

  Drawing on information from all snippets, provide a concise explanation of the issue and recommend a solution.

  Explanation of the issue, and recommended solution, should take a handful of sentences.

  Snippets:

  [+ /usr/lib/rpm/rpmuncompress -x /builddir/build/SOURCES/78af4ff.zip
+ STATUS=0
+ '[' 0 -ne 0 ']'
+ cd libbacktrace-1.0
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.ZcVUQS: line 42: cd: libbacktrace-1.0: No such file or directory]: [Might indicate that source was wrong, since cd to it does not work]
=============
[error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.ZcVUQS (%prep)]: [Failed in %prep]


Answer: Issue: Failed to download proper sources
Resolution: Check how your tarball sourced, maybe check Source: in spec file.
Analyse following RPM build log snippet. Describe contents accurately, without speculation or suggestions for resolution.            
Your analysis must be as concise as possible, while keeping relevant information intact.
Snippet: 
+ /usr/lib/rpm/rpmuncompress -x /builddir/build/SOURCES/78af4ff.zip
+ STATUS=0
+ '[' 0 -ne 0 ']'
+ cd libbacktrace-1.0
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.ZcVUQS: line 42: cd: libbacktrace-1.0: No such file or directory

Answer: Might indicate that source was wrong, since cd to it does not work