Hello John, On Sun, Jun 02, 2013 at 05:05:37PM +0100, John Leach wrote: > Hi all, > > I've been doing a bit of work on the Ruby 2.0 packages. I maintain some > unofficial Ruby package builds for Ubuntu (and have been doing for > years[1]) - mostly just backporting the good work you Debian people do. > > This time though I think I've got something worth feeding back upstream > and thought it was about time I got involved. Thanks for getting in touch. As Ondřej says, more people to help is always appreciated, and you are welcome to contribute more closely. > So I took Antonio Terceiro's initial work and: > > * fixed some install paths I cherry picked this patch, thanks! > * updated symbols for i386/amd64 builds Debian has several other architectures, and it's not feasible to maintain one symbols file for each one of them. There is support for declaring that some symbols are specific to some architectures, so we should use that instead. comparing your i386 and amd64 files tells me which symbols are amd64-only, thanks! > * converted a mis-commited change to the source to a patch actually that was on purpose, I wanted to experiment with --single-debian-patch option of dpkg-source (see debian/source/local-options). My plan for Ruby 2.0 is to avoid carrying patches at all costs, so I didn't want to create debian/patches/ at all. I committed the multiarch fixes backport from Ruby trunk directly to master so that when we import the upstream version that has those fixes we just go back to a empty diff wrt upstream. > * added the patch from 1.9.3 that debianizes rubygems I prefer to make the package depend in rubygems-integration instead of patching every interpreter package. This should also be done to the 1.9 package at some point. rubygems-integration is still missing the part that disables `gem update --system`, though. > * updated Ruby version to 2.0.0p195 this is cool. > I also removed a deleted_on_clean tarballing thing, but I didn't > actually quite understand it so I might have been mistaken doing that. Without this I could not restore my working directory to a clean state, because `make clean` deletes files distributed in the original tarball. > I pushed the code to github: > > https://github.com/brightbox/deb-ruby2.0 > > Is this of use like this? I don't know the best way to contribute my > work to the Debian effort. Happy for any guidance or hand holding offered :) I won't say I will make use of all the changes you did there, but I think your effort is appreciated, and if you want to work together you are more than welcome. > I've done a lot of work packaging Passenger 4 too: > > https://github.com/johnl/deb-passenger/commits/passenger4 > > that's way more involved though, and I suspect more complicated to be > contributed back upstream. Perhaps for another thread: > > https://github.com/johnl/deb-passenger/commits/passenger4 I never touched the passenger package, and didn't read the commits you did on it. But I would say that in general, if you can make your efforts direcly on Debian, it will be appreciated. -- Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature