On 04/08/08 at 21:02 -0000, Neil Wilson wrote: > 2008/8/4 Lucas Nussbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Some notes in random order: > > The install / install / uninstall problem you mention is a gem problem. > > I think that it should be solved at the rubygem side, not specifically > > for Debian. That's over-engineered. Have you talked to the gems > > developers about that? Maybe you could implement a solution directly in > > rubygems. > > To do that would essentially require duplicating much of the > alternatives system within rubygems. Feel free to code that up if you > have a few weeks or months available. > > So I can have a 91 line fix in the packaging and hit Intrepid or > several hundred within rubygems which nobody seems that keen on > writing and get nowhere. > > The gem installation problem is fixed within Debian Policy, the system > is kept clean of dangling links and broken Gems and from the user's > perspective they just see a system that works. > > When rubygems finally get around to implementing something that stops > gem1.8 and gem1.9 running into each other then we can delete the two > small procedures that implement the system. > > It's just a patch, Lucas, to make Gems work better in a packaging > environment. It will allow people to switch ruby interpreters with > greater ease. With good packaging people can do that, and that will > give them a reason to use the packages.
No, it's a patch that makes rubygems work better on systems with update-alternatives, while you should aim at a global solution instead. I won't be the one making the final decision on this, but for this patch to be added to the package, I would either want: (a) that the patch is very, very small (b) or that the patch is going to be integrated upstream in the near future > > Please check what has been done in Debian recently with the rubygems and > > ruby1.9 packages. How rubygems is managed changed a bit. See source > > packages: libgems-ruby >= 1.2.0-1 and ruby1.9 >= 1.9.0.1-5. (ie, the > > versions in intrepid, not hardy). > > If you looked at the package you'd notice that the code is based upon > the latest Debian package in Intrepid (which is missing a default > rubygems package BTW). What do you mean with "default rubygems package"? > Using the new 'operating_system.rb' override > facility simplifies the package immensely by getting all the policy > defaults in one place as well as allowing the user home area gems > facility to work that is currently crippled by the Debian packaging. If you could avoid words like "crippled" in this discussion, it would help *a lot* and wouldn't make me consider unsubscribing from this bug. -- | Lucas Nussbaum | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | -- Add rubygems bin to PATH https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/145267 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
