On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 8:38 PM, Eric Hodel <[email protected]> wrote: > On Dec 31, 2009, at 09:00, Luis Lavena wrote: > >> Let's take the example: thin. >> >> http://gemcutter.org/gems/thin/versions/1.2.5 >> >> Version 1.2.5 depends on: >> >> daemons >= 1.0.9 >> eventmachine >= 0.12.6 >> rack >= 1.0.0 >> >> daemons 1.0.10 suffices the first dependency: >> http://gemcutter.org/gems/daemons/versions/1.0.10 >> >> eventmachine 0.12.10 does the second: >> http://gemcutter.org/gems/eventmachine/versions/0.12.10 >> >> rack 1.0.1 completes the chain: >> http://gemcutter.org/gems/rack/versions/1.0.1 >> >> none of thin dependencies depends on other libraries at runtime. so >> clearly is: >> >> thin: >> - daemons >> - eventmachine >> - rack >> >> With that scenario, the order gems are supposed to be installed are: >> >> eventmachine, daemons, rack, thin >> >> BUT, for some reason, RubyGems does this: >> >> eventmachine, daemons, thin, rack >> >> And when reaches thin, it fails due missing rack. > > DependencyList isn't smart enough to know about runtime vs. development, and > there's a circular dependency between rack and thin, so the order ends up > wrong. I'm working on it.
Thank you Eric. As I explained, my understanding on the issue was pretty rough for not saying nil. Now it worked as expected: C:\Users\Luis\Projects\oss\rubygems>ruby -Ilib bin\gem install thin Building native extensions. This could take a while... Building native extensions. This could take a while... Successfully installed rack-1.1.0 Successfully installed eventmachine-0.12.10 Successfully installed daemons-1.0.10 Successfully installed thin-1.2.5 4 gems installed Thank you! -- Luis Lavena AREA 17 - Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but rather when there is nothing more to take away. Antoine de Saint-Exupéry _______________________________________________ Rubygems-developers mailing list http://rubyforge.org/projects/rubygems [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
