Dne 14.12.2017 v 18:23 Jun Aruga napsal(a):
> OK thanks for the info.
>
> Comparing the result of "gem list" command between upstream and our
> Fedora package, I found the difference.
> That can be confusing people.
>
> Some of the gem are not shown in the result such as cmath for Fedora
> package ruby.
>
> When running below command on mock, we can load cmath that is not in
> "gem list" on mock, maybe those are only shown as a result of "gem
> list".
>
> ```
> irb(main):003:0> require 'cmath'
> => true
> ```
>
> Is it possible to add those gems in the result as a compatibility for
> upstream Ruby?
> Hidden gems such as cmath are confusing users.
Interesting. That is definitely unintentional. Will take a look into it.
V.
> We might also have to add additional gems as a recommendations like
> bigdecimal in ruby.spec as the result.
>
> ```
> Recommends: rubygem(bigdecimal) >= %{bigdecimal_version}
> ```
>
> No "default: " in the gem list for Fedora package is from past
> version. That's fine for me.
>
>
> ## Upstream
>
> On current latest trunk.
>
> $ dest/bin/gem list
>
> *** LOCAL GEMS ***
>
> bigdecimal (default: 1.3.3)
> bundler (default: 1.16.1.pre1)
> cmath (default: 1.0.0)
> csv (default: 1.0.0)
> date (default: 1.0.0)
> dbm (default: 1.0.0)
> digest (default: 0.1.0)
> etc (default: 1.0.0)
> fcntl (default: 1.0.0)
> fileutils (default: 1.0.1)
> gdbm (default: 2.0.0)
> io-console (default: 0.4.6)
> ipaddr (default: 1.2.0)
> json (default: 2.1.0)
> openssl (default: 2.1.0)
> psych (default: 3.0.0)
> rdoc (default: 6.0.0)
> scanf (default: 1.0.0)
> sdbm (default: 1.0.0)
> stringio (default: 0.0.1)
> strscan (default: 0.0.1)
> webrick (default: 1.4.0.beta1)
> zlib (default: 1.0.0)
>
>
> ## Building with your SRPM, and checked on mock environment
>
> After installing all the binary RPMs from your SRPM
>
> <mock-chroot> sh-4.4# gem list
>
> *** LOCAL GEMS ***
>
> bigdecimal (1.3.3)
> did_you_mean (1.1.2)
> io-console (0.4.6)
> json (2.1.0)
> minitest (5.10.3)
> net-telnet (0.1.1)
> openssl (2.1.0.beta2)
> power_assert (1.1.1)
> psych (3.0.0)
> rake (12.3.0)
> rdoc (6.0.0)
> test-unit (3.2.7)
> xmlrpc (0.3.0)
>
>
> Jun
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 5:06 PM, Vít Ondruch <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Well, this is not the way you can get the right archive. You have to use
>> something like:
>>
>>
>> ~~~
>>
>> tool/make-snapshot -packages=xz tmp
>>
>> ~~~
>>
>>
>> I previously published script which can generate the tarball using mock
>> and update the spec file:
>>
>> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/UENHTEFIE5QSFN56QZA2O562QRSL6PSO/
>>
>>
>> V.
>>
>>
>>
>> Dne 14.12.2017 v 15:16 Jun Aruga napsal(a):
>>> Thanks for that.
>>>
>>> I want you to add below kind of comment somethere in
>>> "private-ruby-2.5" branch or master ruby.spec file a way to create
>>> Source0 file.
>>>
>>> # git clone https://github.com/ruby/ruby.git && cd ruby
>>> # git archive --prefix=ruby-2.5.0-r61214/ 06d36a1 | xz >
>>> ruby-2.5.0-r61214.tar.xz
>>>
>>> Possible?
>>>
>>> Jun
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 2:42 PM, Vít Ondruch <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Hi everybody,
>>>>
>>>> Here is another test build of Ruby 2.5, this time it is r61214.
>>>>
>>>> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=23681673
>>>>
>>>> As always, you can find the .spec file in private-ruby-2.5 branch of
>>>> ruby dist-gits.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Vít
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dne 13.4.2017 v 10:54 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Ruby 2.4 was released during Christmas and the upcoming Ruby 2.5
>>>>> development is advancing, so I continue in the tradition and I got
>>>>> r58319 packaged for testing. The updated .spec file is available in
>>>>> dist-git private-ruby-2.5 branch and here is the scratch build:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=18952639
>>>>>
>>>>> One thing I'd like to point out that upstream is working on gemification
>>>>> of StdLib. The question ATM is what the result will be. Hence, there is
>>>>> one big TODO in the .spec file [1]. The question if each of the gems
>>>>> should be unbundled or not. The future will tell hopefully.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Vít
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> [1]
>>>>> http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/ruby.git/tree/ruby.spec?h=private-ruby-2.5#n919
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> ruby-sig mailing list -- [email protected]
>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> ruby-sig mailing list -- [email protected]
>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ruby-sig mailing list -- [email protected]
>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>
>
_______________________________________________
ruby-sig mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
