Hi Lucas, Lucas Nussbaum escreveu isso aí: > Hi, > > So, apparently I needed the feeling that I didn't have to worry anymore with > Ruby to get motivated again. I've spent some time today working on a > replacement for our packaging scripts, using dh7, and I made good progress. > > It's called gem2deb. It's built as a set of small scripts, but combining them > later in a single "get me this gem and build me a .deb" tool will be easy, as > all the logic is in libraries. > > I have reused the gem2tgz script from Antonio Terceiro (thanks!). > > The targetted workflow looks like ([*] = almost fully implemented): > Download gem: > gem fetch foo [*] > | > v > Create a tarball. It contains the gem spec as metadata.yml > gem2tgz foo-1.2.gem [*] > | > v > Convert to a Debian source package with sane defaults: > dh-make-ruby foo-1.2.tar.gz [*] > | > v > Modify, if needed > | > v > Build the package: > dpkg-buildpackage -us -uc Thanks for working on this! :-) > Current status: > gem2tgz and dh-make-ruby work. dh-make-ruby generates a Debian source package > that uses Debhelper 7 with a custom build system (ruby.pm) that calls a > "dh_ruby" script. > dh_ruby is not yet feature-comparable with setup.rb, and needs some work. > > Contributions are very much welcomed. The tool is hosted on github: > https://github.com/ln/gem2deb > There's a number of FIXMEs in lib/gem2deb/dh_ruby.rb, if you are looking for > something to do. Also, I would appreciate a review of my code. Don't you think that we could make dh_ruby use setup.rb itself instead of reimplementing all its features? Even if we had to make some changes to setup.rb to make it fit better, it would be easier to get all it's features that way. > Let's just implement something that works, and then we can discuss boring stuff > such as policy and migration plan. That's for squeeze+1 anyway, of course. That sounds like a good plan. :) -- Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@softwarelivre.org> http://softwarelivre.org/terceiro
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature