Re: ruby 1.9.1 will be ruby's stable release in december
On 19/10/07 at 00:50 +0200, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
>
> Hello again,
>
> Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > - rubygems. ruby 1.9.1 will include rubygems in stdlib (it hasn't been
> > imported yet, according to drbrain@#ruby-lang). This means that we
> > will have to decide whether we continue to package libs from .tgz, or
> > if we want to package some rubygems too.
>
> What do you mean by 'packaging rubygems' ? Would it be reasonable to
> put the .gem file in a debian package, and have it installed by rubygems
> at configure time ?? I argue against:
Me too :-)
What I meant is that "gem install foo" would be run during the package
build, so we can still hack the resulting installation, move files
around, etc. The difference with the current situation are:
- we would install the files in /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/, so those would
only be found by scripts that require 'rubygems'.
- our source tarballs would basically only contain the .gem file.
> * we'll have great pain whenever rubygems has a simple bug, because
> we'll need to deal with that in post-inst and pre-rm; I foresee
> nightmares about this
> * we're wasting disk resources by having both the .gem and the
> unpacked gem
> * we'll have trouble with gems with binary code.
full ack on those points. That's why I want to "gem install" at build
time.
> > I had a long discussion with Eric Hodel (brbrain), and I think that we
> > should package gems. But there's a number of issues that should be dealt
> > with first:
> > - when run 'normally', gem should not install to /usr/lib/ruby/gems, but
> > to some place under /usr/local, to avoid clashes between debian
> > packages and manually installed gems.
> > - binaries from rubygem packages should be installed to /usr/bin, while
> > binaries from manually installed gems should go to /usr/local.
> > - rdoc documentation should be installed to /usr/share/doc
>
> I agree with all these considerations.
>
> > - what about ri documentation ?
>
> I don't know how ri lookup works, but it really should return all
> documentation installed on the system. Currently, ri files go to
> /usr/share/ri/$version/ , so we might want to install ri documentation
> into /usr/share/ri/dist/$version ?
I think that gems already take care of making ri docs from gems
available through the ri command. I'm not sure how. So packaging gems
would partially solve this problem.
--
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |
Reply to: