On Sat, 28 Aug 2010 08:56:05 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum <lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net> wrote:
> > After looking at this issue, I think that we should: > - package rubygems1.8 from rubygems 1.3.7 > - package rubygems for 1.9.1 from the ruby 1.9.2 sources > If it helps deciding what to do: We at Gentoo do the same thing basically. We use 1.3.7 for both but port the changes made in the ruby repository to the 1.9 version of rubygems-1.3.7. It's a ~300 line patch. > While it's not the cleanest approach, it seems that it is the most > reasonable solution given that upstream has failed to make sure that > ruby1.9.2 wouldn't break with rubygems's rubygems. It might happen > again in the future. > The two-repo situation is indeed something that has to go away in the near future, as it's really giving us downstream people a hard time. > We need to decide on the following questions: > > - Do we want to make the installation of rubygems optional with 1.9.1? > (as a separate package ?) That would probably be the right thing to > do since I think that we should make the use of external package > managers optional in Debian, but frankly, if we do that, some users > are going to complain, and I'm totally tired of hearing complains > about ruby packaging in Debian. rubygems is a separate package on Gentoo. We also remove the bundled gems (rdoc, minitest, rake), but rdoc is pulled in after installing ruby by default, so if you do 'emerge ruby:1.9' you end up with a near-complete ruby interpreter, as you get it directly from upstream. If one should prefer not having rdoc or rubygems, they are perfectly free and able to do that as well. > - Do we want to disable gem update --system? I think that we should > allow a way for the user to do it anyway. For example, we could add > a check for a "I_KNOW_WHAT_IM_DOING_ABOUT_GEM_UPDATE_SYSTEM" > environment variable (ok, name could be improved). We would still > refuse to gem update --system by default, but would accept it of the > environment variable was set. We don't disable it update --system at all. I'm not sure if I can offer advice here, as we're in a different situation as a rolling-release distro. > - Paths: until consensus emerge in #448639, we should continue to > install gems in /var. Those changes should be moved to > rubygems/defaults/operating_system.rb, but we may do that later, and > just continue with 01_default_gem_path.diff for now. We've moved recently from /usr/{bin,lib/ruby/gems} to /usr/local. gems from our official package management remain in /usr/ while manually installed gems go to /usr/local. That way we also mitigate that gem-can-overwrite-binary-files problem [0] HTH, Alex [0] http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-core/24472 -- Alex Legler | Gentoo Security / Ruby a...@gentoo.org | a...@jabber.ccc.de
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature