On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 04:06:20PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 29.2.2012 15:23, Stanislav Ochotnicky napsal(a):
>Quoting Emanuel Rietveld (2012-02-29 12:18:57)
>>On 02/29/2012 11:50 AM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>>>Le Mar 28 février 2012 16:29, Vít Ondruch a écrit :
>>>>Pleas do not be mistaken. We are not speaking about building gems from
>>>>sources. We are speaking about building from package manager output,
>>>>i.e. build gem from gem.
>>>So we are shipping stuff, which is not build from other stuff we ship, but
>>>from magic upstream binaries? Not nice at all.
>>It is worth noting that .java files compiled into .class files or .jar
>>files is not the same thing as .rb files. .rb files are not compiled*
>However I have seen gem files containing bundled jar files. Not sure if
>gem unpacking actually helps things, but it might make it more easy to
>spot perhaps. There as easy ways to detect such bundling though, so not
>a problem. Just though I'd mention this use case
Yes, there are gems with bundled jar files. There are also gems which
might carry other binaries. For this case, there apply general
Fedora's "No inclusion of pre-built binaries or libraries" and
"Duplication of system libraries" policies, nothing specific is
needed for Ruby.
Please note that we proposed to do "gem install" in %prep section
which "unpacks" the gem content among other things, so you can spot
such files easily.
Actually, Stanislav has a good point. gem install unpacks, builds,
and installs a gem. So when I do a gem install and then do a find . -name
'*.so' or find . -name '*.jar' I don't know right off the bat whether
files listed were bundled or produced by "gem install". I don't know
whether all of the *.so's were built from source or if there was
a precompiled object file in the gem that was included. So how do you
inspect the results of gem install to determine that there is nothing