Re: trying to update unicorn to 5.1, build failure: VERSION= must be specified

[Pirate Praveen]

On Friday 28 October 2016 05:53 AM, Eric Wong wrote:
> I understand olddoc may not be worth the effort to package in
> Debian.  (I already tried to reduce dependencies in olddoc
> compared to wrongdoc, but a package is a package...)
> 
> Anyways, I suggest you guys grab the generated gemspec from the
> Rubygem or tar.gz.  You already seem to be doing that with NEWS
> and the manpages to avoid a build-dep on pandoc(*).

We are already using the rubygems.org .gem file and it has olddoc.

> Maybe the gemspec in git could have olddoc become optional, too,
> while still remaining DRY.  The email address for the public
> mailing list is already specified in multiple places, so maybe
> over-DRY-ing isn't worth it...

If you can make it optional that would be great. For now I've just
patched out the gemspec to not use olddoc. The patch and fix in rules is
ugly.




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: trying to update unicorn to 5.1, build failure: VERSION= must be specified

[Eric Wong]

Hleb Valoshka <375...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/19/16, Pirate Praveen  wrote:
> > Its pushed to alioth. Can someone check?
> >
> > Error below:
> >
> > $ clean
> > dh clean --buildsystem=ruby --with ruby,systemd
> >dh_testdir -O--buildsystem=ruby
> >dh_auto_clean -O--buildsystem=ruby
> > dh_ruby --clean
> >dh_ruby --clean
> > VERSION= must be specified
> > dh_auto_clean: dh_ruby --clean returned exit code 1
> > debian/rules:6: recipe for target 'clean' failed
> > make: *** [clean] Error 1
> 
> This is not the only problem, then you should have olddoc gem, I
> remember that I tried to fix these error, but I don't see my changes,
> maybe I did this on my home pc, I'll look there.

(oops, missed this earlier)

I understand olddoc may not be worth the effort to package in
Debian.  (I already tried to reduce dependencies in olddoc
compared to wrongdoc, but a package is a package...)

Anyways, I suggest you guys grab the generated gemspec from the
Rubygem or tar.gz.  You already seem to be doing that with NEWS
and the manpages to avoid a build-dep on pandoc(*).

Maybe the gemspec in git could have olddoc become optional, too,
while still remaining DRY.  The email address for the public
mailing list is already specified in multiple places, so maybe
over-DRY-ing isn't worth it...

Anyways, feel free to email me + Cc: unicorn-public@bogomips.org
w.r.t. any packaging/integration issues for any Free Software
systems (not just Debian)


(*) - I'll be switching over to perlpod at some point and
  pod2man is standard in Debian.  I hate having to spend
  ~30MB of bandwidth fees to get ghc + pandoc to build
  manpages.
--
unsubscribe: unicorn-public+unsubscr...@bogomips.org
archive: https://bogomips.org/unicorn-public/