* Helmut Grohne <hel...@subdivi.de> [161003 23:10]: > On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 11:13:13AM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > > What is the expected contract for a package providing ruby-interpreter? > > I wish I could tell. Judging from > https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/Packaging, it seems that > ruby-interpreter requires /usr/bin/ruby. Not sure how official that is. > > > Do it just have to offer a /usr/bin/ruby alternative?
Given that ruby-interpreter is listed as an alternative to ruby, anything that provides ruby-interpreter needs to have at least all the binaries from ruby. The harder part is actually having these binaries work with the libraries that depend on ruby-interpreter. (They are installed into shared and/or versioned directories and may ship .so files.) > I'm not sure we currently support non-default ruby implementations. > Which indicates that jruby should simply drop the provides. I do not think it is feasible today to ship a ruby implementation that provides ruby-interpreter without (some form of) support in gem2deb. Best is probably to just drop the Provides in jruby. -- ,''`. Christian Hofstaedtler <z...@debian.org> : :' : Debian Developer `. `' 7D1A CFFA D9E0 806C 9C4C D392 5C13 D6DB 9305 2E03 `-
