fedora-copr/log_detective_qna huggingface dataset:
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: 'usrsctp-devel'

Answer: Package `usrsctp-devel` 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: 
Error: Some packages could not be found.

Answer: Error indicating that the package manager couldn't find certain requested packages.
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:

  [tests/test_syntax.py:123: AssertionError]: [To understand that test has been failed]


Answer: Issue: Test case execution failure
Resolution: Patch the failed tests to make it compatible with new upstream release of this package.
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: 
tests/test_syntax.py:123: AssertionError

Answer: To understand that test has been 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:

  [patching file daemon/plasma-powerdevil.service.in
Hunk #1 FAILED at 4.
1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file daemon/plasma-powerdevil.service.in.rej
]: [This shows why build failed]


Answer: Issue: Build log shows that Patching a file is failed. Maybe this patch was there in previous build and patching new upstream source with old patch is not compatible.
Resolution: Check if patch is already merged in new upstream source if not then rebase the patch with new upstream releases source.
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: 
patching file daemon/plasma-powerdevil.service.in
Hunk #1 FAILED at 4.
1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file daemon/plasma-powerdevil.service.in.rej


Answer: This shows why build 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:

  [ERROR: Meson version is 1.3.2 but project requires >= 1.4.0
]: [Build reported an error due to insufficient build system version.]


Answer: Issue: Meson build system was of older version 1.3.2, but the required version is newer or equal to 1.4.0.
Resolution: Update the meson build system either via package repository or directly via pip.
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: Meson version is 1.3.2 but project requires >= 1.4.0


Answer: Build reported an error due to insufficient build system version.
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: 
[2024-01-26 15:23:19,253][ ERROR][PID:3560690] Build failed: Backend process error: No success file => build failur

Answer: General build failure report.
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: 
[2024-01-26 15:23:19,259][ ERROR][PID:3560690] Backend process error: No success file => build failur

Answer: General build failure report.
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:

  [calendar_notes.c:79:30: error: too many arguments to function ‘cnfunc’; expected 0, have 2
   79 |                         if ((*cnfunc)(n, appGUI) == TRUE)
      |                             ~^~~~~~~~ ~
make[2]: *** [Makefile:539: calendar_notes.o] Error 1]: [This snippet shows why the build failed.]
=============
[check_events.c:1133:62: error: passing argument 3 of ‘cal_notes_foreach’ from incompatible pointer type [-Wincompatible-pointer-types]
 1133 |                 cal_notes_foreach (start_date, current_date, add_note_to_event_window, appGUI);
      |                                                              ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      |                                                              |
      |                                                              gboolean (*)(struct note *, GUI *) {aka int (*)(struct note *, GUI *)}
In file included from check_events.c:27:
calendar_notes.h:56:95: note: expected ‘gboolean (*)(void)’ {aka ‘int (*)(void)’} but argument is of type ‘gboolean (*)(struct note *, GUI *)’ {aka ‘int (*)(struct note *, GUI *)’}
   56 | void        cal_notes_foreach           (guint32 julian_start, guint32 julian_end, gboolean (*cnfunc)(), GUI *appGUI);
      |                                                                                    ~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~]: [This snipped shows second error that makes the build fail, it's the same kind of error as in the first snippet.]


Answer: Issue: The build failed because the function declaration differs from the actual function call later. This kind of error may appear when the default language version for C compilation is changed from -std=gnu17 to -std=gnu23. In C17 and earlier, function declarators in form of rettype identifier(); specified no information about the number or types of the parameters while in C23 such declarations mean (void) i. e. a function taking no arguments.
Resolution: Code relying on a non-zero number of parameters can be fixed by adding the correct parameters to the function declaration. In other cases the code may be simply missing a #include of the correct header and can be fixed by including the correct header and removing the declaration. Alternatively you can use -std= to select an earlier version of C standard or report the issue upstream.
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: 
calendar_notes.c:79:30: error: too many arguments to function ‘cnfunc’; expected 0, have 2
   79 |                         if ((*cnfunc)(n, appGUI) == TRUE)
      |                             ~^~~~~~~~ ~
make[2]: *** [Makefile:539: calendar_notes.o] Error 1

Answer: This snippet shows 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: 
check_events.c:1133:62: error: passing argument 3 of ‘cal_notes_foreach’ from incompatible pointer type [-Wincompatible-pointer-types]
 1133 |                 cal_notes_foreach (start_date, current_date, add_note_to_event_window, appGUI);
      |                                                              ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      |                                                              |
      |                                                              gboolean (*)(struct note *, GUI *) {aka int (*)(struct note *, GUI *)}
In file included from check_events.c:27:
calendar_notes.h:56:95: note: expected ‘gboolean (*)(void)’ {aka ‘int (*)(void)’} but argument is of type ‘gboolean (*)(struct note *, GUI *)’ {aka ‘int (*)(struct note *, GUI *)’}
   56 | void        cal_notes_foreach           (guint32 julian_start, guint32 julian_end, gboolean (*cnfunc)(), GUI *appGUI);
      |                                                                                    ~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~

Answer: This snipped shows second error that makes the build fail, it's the same kind of error as in the first snippet.
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:

  [  File "/builddir/build/BUILD/python-twisted-24.11.0-build/twisted-twisted-24.11.0/src/twisted/conch/test/test_cftp.py", line 212, in ListingTests
    locale.setlocale(locale.LC_ALL, currentLocale)
  File "/usr/lib64/python3.13/locale.py", line 615, in setlocale
    return _setlocale(category, locale)
locale.Error: unsupported locale setting]: [Test is trying to set a locale to a `locale.LC_ALL`, but that locale setting that is attempted is not supported in the default mock environment.]
=============
[--setenv=LANG=C.UTF-8]: [Default LANG used also for locale is set to C.UTF-8 which is less featureful than a specific language UTF-8.]


Answer: Issue: Python test of name "twisted.conch.test.test_cftp" in %check failed with "locale.Error: unsupported locale setting" when trying to set "locale.LC_ALL" for the locale.
Resolution: Add `export LC_ALL=en_US.UTF-8` before tests execution to force UTF-8 locale for LC_ALL.
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 "/builddir/build/BUILD/python-twisted-24.11.0-build/twisted-twisted-24.11.0/src/twisted/conch/test/test_cftp.py", line 212, in ListingTests
    locale.setlocale(locale.LC_ALL, currentLocale)
  File "/usr/lib64/python3.13/locale.py", line 615, in setlocale
    return _setlocale(category, locale)
locale.Error: unsupported locale setting

Answer: Test is trying to set a locale to a `locale.LC_ALL`, but that locale setting that is attempted is not supported in the default mock environment.
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: 
--setenv=LANG=C.UTF-8

Answer: Default LANG used also for locale is set to C.UTF-8 which is less featureful than a specific language UTF-8.
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:

  [configure:13709: error: possibly undefined macro: AM_NLS
      If this token and others are legitimate, please use m4_pattern_allow.
      See the Autoconf documentation.
autoreconf: error: /usr/bin/autoconf failed with exit status: 1]: [AM_NLS is provided by gettext package and it look that this package is missing on the build system.]


Answer: Issue: AM_NLS macro is not recognized.
Resolution: Make sure that gettext si present during build (add BuildRequires: gettext  to 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: 
configure:13709: error: possibly undefined macro: AM_NLS
      If this token and others are legitimate, please use m4_pattern_allow.
      See the Autoconf documentation.
autoreconf: error: /usr/bin/autoconf failed with exit status: 1

Answer: AM_NLS is provided by gettext package and it look that this package is missing on the build system.
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:

  [Test project /builddir/build/BUILD/dnf5-5.2.14.0-build/dnf5-git-4045.67e94c3/redhat-linux-build
      Start  1: test_libdnf
 1/24 Test  #1: test_libdnf .................................................***Failed    1.57 sec]: [Shows a failing test]
=============
[test_advisory.cpp:46:Assertion
Test name: AdvisoryAdvisoryTest::test_get_name
equality assertion failed
- Expected: DNF-2019-1
- Actual  : DDNF-2019-1

Failures !!!
Run: 436   Failure total: 1   Failures: 1   Errors: 0]: [Shows how the test fails]


Answer: Issue: One particular unit test of the built package failed.
Resolution: Fix or disable the 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: 
Test project /builddir/build/BUILD/dnf5-5.2.14.0-build/dnf5-git-4045.67e94c3/redhat-linux-build
      Start  1: test_libdnf
 1/24 Test  #1: test_libdnf .................................................***Failed    1.57 sec

Answer: Shows a failing 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: 
test_advisory.cpp:46:Assertion
Test name: AdvisoryAdvisoryTest::test_get_name
equality assertion failed
- Expected: DNF-2019-1
- Actual  : DDNF-2019-1

Failures !!!
Run: 436   Failure total: 1   Failures: 1   Errors: 0

Answer: Shows how the test fails
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: The version in the Python package metadata 0.0.0 normalizes to zero.
It's likely a packaging error caused by missing version information
(e.g. when using a version control system snapshot as a source).
Try providing the version information manually when building the Python package,
for example by setting the SETUPTOOLS_SCM_PRETEND_VERSION environment variable if the package uses setuptools_scm.
If you are confident that the version of the Python package is intentionally zero,
you may %define the _python_dist_allow_version_zero macro in the spec file to disable this check.

error: Dependency tokens must begin with alpha-numeric, '_' or '/': *** PYTHON_PROVIDED_VERSION_NORMALIZES_TO_ZERO___SEE_STDERR ***]: [This snippet explains that package metadata version is normalized to zero. This is undesired, since package has a non-zero actual version (0.5.6-1.fc43). There is likely a definition error in the package.]


Answer: Issue: The build failed because RPM macros contain a fail-safe, if they detect that the virtual provides would contain a version 0.0.0. This is considered an error in most of the cases and RPM doesn't allow to create package containing invalid version metadata.
Resolution: If  the package uses setuptools_scm, setting the SETUPTOOLS_SCM_PRETEND_VERSION environment variable should solve the issue. If it doesn't use setuptools_scm, the package code should be reviewed and fixed, as it is likely a programming 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: 
Error: The version in the Python package metadata 0.0.0 normalizes to zero.
It's likely a packaging error caused by missing version information
(e.g. when using a version control system snapshot as a source).
Try providing the version information manually when building the Python package,
for example by setting the SETUPTOOLS_SCM_PRETEND_VERSION environment variable if the package uses setuptools_scm.
If you are confident that the version of the Python package is intentionally zero,
you may %define the _python_dist_allow_version_zero macro in the spec file to disable this check.

error: Dependency tokens must begin with alpha-numeric, '_' or '/': *** PYTHON_PROVIDED_VERSION_NORMALIZES_TO_ZERO___SEE_STDERR ***

Answer: This snippet explains that package metadata version is normalized to zero. This is undesired, since package has a non-zero actual version (0.5.6-1.fc43). There is likely a definition error in the package.
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:
DEBUG util.py:459:  No match for argument: pygobject3-devel]: [The pygobject3-devel package could not be matched by dnf and therefore installed.]


Answer: Issue: The pygobject3-devel package listed as BuildRequires could not be matched and therefore installed. Either the package name was misspelled or the package was renamed.
Resolution: Ensure the pygobject3-devel package listed in BuildRequires is typed correctly and the package is available on the public 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: 
DEBUG util.py:459:  Failed to resolve the transaction:
DEBUG util.py:459:  No match for argument: pygobject3-devel

Answer: The pygobject3-devel package could not be matched by dnf and therefore installed.
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:

  [configure: error: unrecognized option: '-march=armv8-a+crypto']: [The configure script failed because it encountered an unrecognized compiler option.]


Answer: Issue: The build failed because the configure script encountered an unrecognized architecture-specific compiler option.
Resolution: Properly set up which flags should be used for each architecture.
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: 
configure: error: unrecognized option: '-march=armv8-a+crypto'

Answer: The configure script failed because it encountered an unrecognized compiler option.
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) >= 1.38.42)]: [dnf output stating missing dependency]


Answer: Issue: There was unsatisfied dnf dependency.
Resolution: Make sure dnf repositories contain the dependency.
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) >= 1.38.42)

Answer: dnf output stating missing dependency
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:  curl: (22) The requested URL returned error: 404]: [Downloading of the sources fails with error code 404.]


Answer: Issue: Sources of the package could not be fetched.
Resolution: You may have forgotten to upload the sources of the package.
Another possibility is that the Fedora dist-git service is down.
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:  curl: (22) The requested URL returned error: 404

Answer: Downloading of the sources fails with error code 404.
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: Directory not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/z3-4.14.1-build/BUILDROOT/app/lib/python3.13/site-packages/z3
    absolute symlink: /app/lib64/z3/com.microsoft.z3.jar -> /app/lib/java/com.microsoft.z3.jar
    Directory not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/z3-4.14.1-build/BUILDROOT/app/lib/python3.13/site-packages/z3
Child return code was: 1]: [Reason of failure.]


Answer: Issue: The build process is expecting /app/lib/python3.13/site-packages/z3 folder to be available in the BUILDROOT directory.
Resolution: Check your .spec file and fix potential typo in the folder path. If such folder is not generated or available during the build process, remove it's reference from the .spec file %files 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: 
error: Directory not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/z3-4.14.1-build/BUILDROOT/app/lib/python3.13/site-packages/z3
    absolute symlink: /app/lib64/z3/com.microsoft.z3.jar -> /app/lib/java/com.microsoft.z3.jar
    Directory not found: /builddir/build/BUILD/z3-4.14.1-build/BUILDROOT/app/lib/python3.13/site-packages/z3
Child return code was: 1

Answer: Reason of 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:

  [
../../designer/pluginloader.cpp:146:17: error: âPy_SetProgramNameâ was not declared in this scope; did you mean âPy_GetProgramNameâ]: [Py_SetProgramName is not declared in pluginloader.cpp]


Answer: Issue: Py_SetProgramName is not declared.
Resolution: Import/Declare Py_SetProgramName or change the line.
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: 

../../designer/pluginloader.cpp:146:17: error: âPy_SetProgramNameâ was not declared in this scope; did you mean âPy_GetProgramNameâ

Answer: Py_SetProgramName is not declared in pluginloader.cpp
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:

  [go: go.mod requires go >= 1.23.3 (running go 1.23.1; GOTOOLCHAIN=local)
]: [This build reguires go version at least 1.23.3 or higher but version 1.23.1 is used for building a package.]


Answer: Issue: Because older version than needed of Go language tried to use for build process.
Resolution: The package depends on newer version of Go language. It should be available for target platform and prepared first. In that case build requirements should be specified in the 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: 
go: go.mod requires go >= 1.23.3 (running go 1.23.1; GOTOOLCHAIN=local)


Answer: This build reguires go version at least 1.23.3 or higher but version 1.23.1 is used for building a package.
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:

  [tests/meson.build:22:6: ERROR: Command `/builddir/build/BUILD/gnome-bluetooth-47.1-build/gnome-bluetooth-47.1/tests/unittest_inspector.py /builddir/build/BUILD/gnome-bluetooth-47.1-build/gnome-bluetooth-47.1/tests/integration-test.py` failed with status 1.
A full log can be found at /builddir/build/BUILD/gnome-bluetooth-47.1-build/gnome-bluetooth-47.1/redhat-linux-build/meson-logs/meson-log.txt]: [It indicates that the build issue was caused by the failure of one of gnome-bluetooth tests. In this case, the unittest_inspector.py test script.]


Answer: Issue: There was a programming error in the unittest_inspector.py caused by its used of now deprecated pygobject APIs for importing GObject Introspection (GI) modules.
Resolution: Fix the integration-test.py file to use modern pygobject import syntax. Include in a new upstream release of gnome-bluetooth or as a downstream package for the gnome-bluetooth RPM package.
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: 
tests/meson.build:22:6: ERROR: Command `/builddir/build/BUILD/gnome-bluetooth-47.1-build/gnome-bluetooth-47.1/tests/unittest_inspector.py /builddir/build/BUILD/gnome-bluetooth-47.1-build/gnome-bluetooth-47.1/tests/integration-test.py` failed with status 1.
A full log can be found at /builddir/build/BUILD/gnome-bluetooth-47.1-build/gnome-bluetooth-47.1/redhat-linux-build/meson-logs/meson-log.txt

Answer: It indicates that the build issue was caused by the failure of one of gnome-bluetooth tests. In this case, the unittest_inspector.py test script.
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: Some packages could not be foun]: [Describes the error that some packages needed for build could not be found]
=============
[
No matching package to install: 'python3.11dist(babel) >= 2.9'
No matching package to install: 'python3.11dist(cython) >= 3'
Package python3.11-flit-core-3.9.0-4.el9.noarch is already installed.
Package python3.11-packaging-21.3-1.el9.noarch is already installed.
No matching package to install: 'python3.11dist(imagesize) >= 1.3'
No matching package to install: 'python3.11dist(jinja2) >= 3'
Package python3.11-packaging-21.3-1.el9.noarch is already installed.
Package python3.11-pip-22.3.1-4.el9_3.1.noarch is already installed.
No matching package to install: 'python3.11dist(pygments) >= 2.14'
No matching package to install: 'python3.11dist(setuptools) >= 67'
No matching package to install: 'python3.11dist(snowballstemmer) >= ]: [Says exactly which packages could not be found during installation]


Answer: Issue: Some packages required for build could not be found in enabled repositories.
Resolution: Enable repositories containing required packages.
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: Some packages could not be foun

Answer: Describes the error that some packages needed for build could not 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: 

No matching package to install: 'python3.11dist(babel) >= 2.9'
No matching package to install: 'python3.11dist(cython) >= 3'
Package python3.11-flit-core-3.9.0-4.el9.noarch is already installed.
Package python3.11-packaging-21.3-1.el9.noarch is already installed.
No matching package to install: 'python3.11dist(imagesize) >= 1.3'
No matching package to install: 'python3.11dist(jinja2) >= 3'
Package python3.11-packaging-21.3-1.el9.noarch is already installed.
Package python3.11-pip-22.3.1-4.el9_3.1.noarch is already installed.
No matching package to install: 'python3.11dist(pygments) >= 2.14'
No matching package to install: 'python3.11dist(setuptools) >= 67'
No matching package to install: 'python3.11dist(snowballstemmer) >= 

Answer: Says exactly which packages could not be found during installation
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:

  [meson.build:1:0: ERROR: Value "consolekit" (of type "string") for option "session_tracking" is not one of the choices. Possible choices are (as string): "logind", "elogind", "ConsoleKit".]: [Error report during configuration phase.]


Answer: Issue: Configuration in Meson Build System is case sensitive. The configuration option used in %build phase in spec file doesn't match case-sensitive options provided.
Resolution: Correct the configuration option used with case sensitivity in mind for Meson Build System.
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: 
meson.build:1:0: ERROR: Value "consolekit" (of type "string") for option "session_tracking" is not one of the choices. Possible choices are (as string): "logind", "elogind", "ConsoleKit".

Answer: Error report during configuration 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:

  [DEBUG util.py:459:  error: parse error in expression:  0%{fedora} >= 41 || 09 >= 11
DEBUG util.py:459:  error:                              ^
DEBUG util.py:459:  error: /chroot_tmpdir/srpm_unpacked/SPECS/libuser.spec:21: bad %if condition:  0%{fedora} >= 41 || 09 >= 11
DEBUG util.py:608:  Child return code was: 1]: [rpmbuild cant parse spec file macro]


Answer: Issue: macro is not defined and not marker optional
Resolution: Either define macro or use question mark like %{?mymacro} to allow undefined macro.
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:  error: parse error in expression:  0%{fedora} >= 41 || 09 >= 11
DEBUG util.py:459:  error:                              ^
DEBUG util.py:459:  error: /chroot_tmpdir/srpm_unpacked/SPECS/libuser.spec:21: bad %if condition:  0%{fedora} >= 41 || 09 >= 11
DEBUG util.py:608:  Child return code was: 1

Answer: rpmbuild cant parse spec file macro
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:

  [/tmp/ksh93.shtests.38534.14596/shcomp-leaks.ksh: line 191: B��U: arithmetic syntax error
test leaks(shcomp) failed at 2025-05-22+04:21:19 with exit code 1 [ 36 tests 1 error ]]: [Failed test]


Answer: Issue: The testsuite of the package failed.
Resolution: Analyse the test failure in detail.  If unsure, contact upstream for additional assistance.
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: 
/tmp/ksh93.shtests.38534.14596/shcomp-leaks.ksh: line 191: B��U: arithmetic syntax error
test leaks(shcomp) failed at 2025-05-22+04:21:19 with exit code 1 [ 36 tests 1 error ]

Answer: Failed test
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: elpa-mpich-devel >= 2018.05.0]: [Dependency 'elpa-mpich-devel' is not available.]
=============
[
No match for argument: elpa-openmpi-devel >= 2018.05.0]: [Dependency 'elpa-openmpi-devel' is not available.]
=============
[
 fedora                                 100% | 925.1 KiB/s |  23.1 KiB |  00m00s
 Copr repository                        100% | 130.4 KiB/s |   1.8 KiB |  00m00s
 Additional repo copr_scikit_build_rele 100% | 181.7 KiB/s |   1.8 KiB |  00m0]: [DNF repositories that are available: fedora, Copr, copr_scikit_build_rele...]


Answer: Issue: DNF dependencies are not available.
Resolution: Ensure dependencies are available.
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: elpa-mpich-devel >= 2018.05.0

Answer: Dependency 'elpa-mpich-devel' is not available.
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: elpa-openmpi-devel >= 2018.05.0

Answer: Dependency 'elpa-openmpi-devel' is not available.
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: 

 fedora                                 100% | 925.1 KiB/s |  23.1 KiB |  00m00s
 Copr repository                        100% | 130.4 KiB/s |   1.8 KiB |  00m00s
 Additional repo copr_scikit_build_rele 100% | 181.7 KiB/s |   1.8 KiB |  00m0

Answer: DNF repositories that are available: fedora, Copr, copr_scikit_build_rele...
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:

  [configure: error: GOTCHA support is mandatory for Score-P. Try '--with-libgotcha=download'.
configure: error: ../../build-backend/configure failed for build-backen]: [The libgotcha library was not found in the BuildRequires.]
=============
[error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.lrffbY (%build)
    Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.lrffbY (%build)]: [The build failed during the %build phase.]


Answer: Issue: libgotcha was not specified in the BuildRequires and it is needed during the configuration of the package.
Resolution: Ensure that libgotcha is provided by the BuildRequires during the 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: 
configure: error: GOTCHA support is mandatory for Score-P. Try '--with-libgotcha=download'.
configure: error: ../../build-backend/configure failed for build-backen

Answer: The libgotcha library was not found in the BuildRequires.
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.lrffbY (%build)
    Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.lrffbY (%build)

Answer: The build failed during the %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:

  [DEBUG util.py:459:  Failed to resolve the transaction:
DEBUG util.py:459:  Problem: nothing provides requested (php-composer(ralouphie/getallheaders) >= 2.0.5 with php-composer(ralouphie/getallheaders) < 4.0)
DEBUG util.py:608:  Child return code was: 1
]: [DNF fails to resolve dependency]


Answer: Issue: php-composer(ralouphie/getallheaders) version >= 2.0.5  and < 4 is not available

Resolution: If ralouphie/getallheaders is needed at runtime
- the package needs to be adapted to run with available version
- OR required version needs to be added to the repository 
- OR this package be retired

If this package is only required at buildtime, for test suite:
- tests needs to be adapted for version available
- OR relevant unit tests ignored
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:
DEBUG util.py:459:  Problem: nothing provides requested (php-composer(ralouphie/getallheaders) >= 2.0.5 with php-composer(ralouphie/getallheaders) < 4.0)
DEBUG util.py:608:  Child return code was: 1


Answer: DNF fails to resolve dependency
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: 
note: we would appreciate a bug report: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/new?labels=C-bug%2C+I-ICE%2C+T-compiler&template=ice.md

Answer: Description of how to notify upstream
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:

  [
  file /etc/dnf/dnf.conf from install of libdnf5-5.1.14-1.fc41.x86_64 conflicts with file from package dnf-data-4.19.0-1.fc40.noar]: [It's not possible to install all the required packages because there's a file conflict between a newly installed (libdnf5) and an already installed (dnf-data) package.
]


Answer: Issue: Some of the required packages were not installed.

Resolution: Resolve the conflict first.
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:461:  No match for argument: python3dist(awscrt)]: [It shows that the builder could not find python3dist(awscrt)]


Answer: Issue: The builder could not find the BuildRequires dependency 'python3dist(awscrt)'.
Resolution: Change the BuildRequires from python3dist(awscrt) to python3-awscrt.
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:461:  No match for argument: python3dist(awscrt)

Answer: It shows that the builder could not find python3dist(awscrt)
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:

  [PHPUnit 7.5.20 by Sebastian Bergmann and contributors.
Runtime:       PHP 8.4.8RC1]: [Test suite use phpunit7 with PHP 8.4]
=============
[PHPUnit\Framework\ExceptionWrapper::originalException(): Implicitly marking parameter $exceptionToStore as nullable is deprecated, the explicit nullable type must be used instead]: [phpunit raise a exception]


Answer: Issue: phpunit7 has reached its end of life and is not supported upstream.
phpunit7 is not compatible with PHP 8.4
Resolution: %check should switch to a more recent version of PHPUnit (phpunit8, phpunit9...)

The test suite may need to be adapted to new PHPUnit version.
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: 
PHPUnit 7.5.20 by Sebastian Bergmann and contributors.
Runtime:       PHP 8.4.8RC1

Answer: Test suite use phpunit7 with PHP 8.4