On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 11:17:59AM +0100, David RodrÃguez wrote: > Hi! > > Just to clarify why I prefer the second solution, I think what debian does is > shipping precompiled versions of extensions, so technically the gemspec > shipped in the debian should include no extensions at all. This is something > some upstream gems already do. Take, for example, google-protobuf. It has a > precompiled version for linux: > https://rubygems.org/gems/google-protobuf/versions/3.13.0-x86_64-linux. If we > fetch and unpack this package, we can see it includes the prebuilt `.so` > extension, but no extensions in its gemspec: > > $ gem fetch google-protobuf > Fetching google-protobuf-3.13.0-x86_64-linux.gem > Downloaded google-protobuf-3.13.0-x86_64-linux > > $ gem unpack google-protobuf-3.13.0-x86_64-linux.gem > Unpacked gem: > '/home/deivid/Code/playground/google-protobuf-3.13.0-x86_64-linux' > > $ find google-protobuf-3.13.0-x86_64-linux -name '*.so' > google-protobuf-3.13.0-x86_64-linux/lib/google/2.6/protobuf_c.so > google-protobuf-3.13.0-x86_64-linux/lib/google/2.4/protobuf_c.so > google-protobuf-3.13.0-x86_64-linux/lib/google/2.7/protobuf_c.so > google-protobuf-3.13.0-x86_64-linux/lib/google/2.5/protobuf_c.so > google-protobuf-3.13.0-x86_64-linux/lib/google/2.3/protobuf_c.so > > $ gem unpack google-protobuf-3.13.0-x86_64-linux.gem --spec && grep > extensions google-protobuf-3.13.0-x86_64-linux.gemspec > extensions: [] > > I think the cleanest solution would be for debian to do the same thing.
Fair enough. Now that I think about it, extensions is supposed to be a list of extensions that need to be built, so indeed dropping it from the gemspec included in the Debian packages make sense. Thanks!
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
