On 06/23/2010 01:13 PM, Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
Sorry now I am fixing up other packages, however:
Jim Meyering wrote, at 06/24/2010 01:40 AM +9:00:
> Jim Meyering wrote:
>
>
>> Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
>>
>>> Jim Meyering wrote, at 06/23/2010 07:31 PM +9:00:
>>>
>>>> Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>> In some cases ruby modules install ruby script and C extension
module
>>>>> in the same name.
>>>>> - e.g. On i686 ruby-gnome2-0.19.4-2.fc14.i686 installs
>>>>> * gnome2.rb under /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/
>>>>> * gnome2.so under /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/i386-linux/
>>>>> In this case, with current 1.8.6.x ruby srpm (and also my 1.8.7.x
srpm)
>>>>>
>>>> Would you please point me to your latest 1.8.7.x srpm ?
>>>>
>>> Currently at:
>>>
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/scratch/mtasaka/task_2258338/
>>>
>> Thank you.
>> I have begun reviewing it.
>> I have adopted the changes that split some of the longer-than-80 lines.
>>
(and I just note that I prefer to write one (Build)Requires on each line
because it is easier to read, especially when (Build)Requires changed)
Agreed.
> I built from your srpm, and ran this in the build directory
> on an x86_64 system:
>
> $ LD_LIBRARY_PATH=. ./ruby -e 'puts $:'
> /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8
> /usr/lib64/ruby/site_ruby/1.8
> /usr/lib64/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/x86_64-linux
> /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby
> /usr/lib64/ruby/site_ruby
> /usr/lib64/site_ruby/1.8
> /usr/lib64/site_ruby/1.8/x86_64-linux
> /usr/lib64/site_ruby
> /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/1.8
> /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/1.8/x86_64-linux
> /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby
> /usr/lib/ruby/1.8
> /usr/lib64/ruby/1.8
> /usr/lib64/ruby/1.8/x86_64-linux
> .
>
> Is that the path you intend?
> Based on what you said, I expected it to match the path of 1.8.6.x:
>
> /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8
> /usr/lib64/ruby/site_ruby/1.8
> /usr/lib64/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/x86_64-linux
> /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby
> /usr/lib64/ruby/site_ruby
> /usr/lib64/site_ruby/1.8
> /usr/lib64/site_ruby/1.8/x86_64-linux
> /usr/lib64/site_ruby
> /usr/lib/ruby/1.8
> /usr/lib64/ruby/1.8
> /usr/lib64/ruby/1.8/x86_64-linux
> .
>
> Actually, it looks fine, as long as the addition of the three
> new vendor_ruby/* directories is desired.
>
The new 1.8.7 search path as provided by my rpm is as follows:
1.
/usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8
2.
/usr/lib64/ruby/site_ruby/1.8
3.
/usr/lib64/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/x86_64-linux
4.
/usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby
5.
/usr/lib64/ruby/site_ruby
6.
/usr/lib/ruby/1.8
7.
/usr/lib64/ruby/1.8
8.
/usr/lib64/ruby/1.8/x86_64-linux
As noted before, /usr/lib64/site_ruby subdirs were removed as the Ruby
1.8.6 package doesn't provide that dir
Well, while I don't use vendor_ruby now (and with the transition
from
1.8.6.x to 1.8.7.x on Fedora perhaps this is not needed),
actually this is the upstream change:
from ruby_1_8_7/NEWS:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
19 == Changes since the 1.8.6 release
20
21 === Configuration changes
22
23 * vendor_ruby directory
24
25 A new library directory named `vendor_ruby' is introduced in
26 addition to `site_ruby'. The idea is to separate libraries
27 installed by the package system (`vendor') from manually (`site')
28 installed libraries preventing the former from getting overwritten
29 by the latter, while preserving the user option to override vendor
30 libraries with site libraries. (`site_ruby' takes precedence over
31 `vendor_ruby')
32
33 If you are a package maintainer, make each library package configure
34 the library passing the `--vendor' option to `extconf.rb' so that
35 the library files will get installed under `vendor_ruby'.
36
37 You can change the directory locations using configure options such
38 as `--with-sitedir=DIR' and `--with-vendordir=DIR'.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
So as this is the explicit upstream change, I want to
keep this.
Regards,
Mamoru
_______________________________________________
ruby-sig mailing list
ruby-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig
I make use of the --with-vendordir flag in my ruby 1.8.7 specfile so we
should be good to go. Is there anything else you need me to merge into
mine? (either from your 1.8.7 srpm/spec, upstream, or something I
removed by mistake?)
-Mo