Re: gem2deb: support for building using setup.rb
On 16/05/11 at 23:06 +0200, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
> On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 10:39 PM, Antonio Terceiro
> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >> > http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-ruby-extras/gem2deb.git;a=commitdiff;h=fb547d84b5545ac5dee8de9023ccae51d5cf61da
> >> >
> >> > So you should be good by overriding install_files_and_build_extensions
> >> > on your new class.
> >> I've done that, and did as well for tests so far, but just stating it
> >> is currently not supported. I need to dig a little more into this.
> >> > after (or instead of) `setup.rb clean`, shouldn't you also do `setup.rb distclean`?
> >> > (I think ruby-pkg-tools does something like that)
> >> I've changed to distclean.
> >> I've attached an archive of git format-patch, to avoid blundering too
> >> much with the master repository.
> > That looks nice!
> Cool !
> > I didn't understand, however, why you overrode run_tests to disable them:
> > as far as I can see, the way of running the package tests used in
> > the main dh_ruby must work ok.
> I'm unsure about that: the testrunner.rb uses the source directory
> as library path for loading the test files. Of course, this will work
> for pure ruby libraries, but, at least for setup.rb, it will fail
> miserably for built extensions, since the build cleans up the built
> files in the source after installing. I'm wondering: shouldn't
> testrunner.rb rather use debian/package/usr/lib/vendor_ruby and co as
> library path ? This is guaranteed to work, at least if tests are run
> *after* installation (which is the case) ?
Mmmh, yes, probably. Could you experiment with the idea and provide a