On Sat, May 02, 2020 at 02:59:36PM +0200, Daniel Leidert wrote: > Am Freitag, den 01.05.2020, 21:20 -0300 schrieb Antonio Terceiro: > > Control: reassign -1 libruby2.7 > > Control: found -1 2.7.0-6 > > > > On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 09:12:57PM -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > > > Control: reassign -1 ruby2.7 > > > Control: found -1 2.7.0-6 > > > > > > On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 10:23:56PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > > > > Using system bundler... > > > > Installing gems with rubygems ... > > > > sh: 1: bundle: not found > > > > > > libruby2.7 now has some Provides: for libraries builtin to the standard > > > library, including ruby-bundler. But since ruby-bundler also provides a > > > `bundle` binary, which libruby2.7 does not, then this Provides: is not > > > really correct. > > > > > > Instead, libruby2.7 should depend on ruby-bundler, like it already does on > > > rake, ruby-test-unit and others, and not provide it. > > > > It's on libruby2.7, not ruby2.7 > > The binary is in ruby2.7. IMHO our approach should be: > > - ship a symlink /usr/bin/bundle -> /usr/bin/bundle2.7 with ruby(-defaults), > - handle the symlink via dpkg-divert if ruby-bundler gets installed, and > - keep the provides in libruby2.7.
the problem with this is that the binaries would be provided by ruby(-defaults), and the actual Provides: would be in libruby2.7. Although it would work, because there is a circular dependency between libruby2.7 and ruby, it's not entirely correct. FWIW, racc is in a similar situation: libruby2.7 Provides: ruby-racc, but not the racc binary (provided by the racc package). There is no real ruby-racc package though. For now, I have commited a change to ruby to drop ruby-bundler from Provides:, but we can revisit this later with a solution that is consistent for bundler, racc, and any other package that ruby might absorb that also contains a binary.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
