Prep, build and install

Mo Morsi mmorsi at
Thu Dec 22 13:17:24 UTC 2011

On 12/22/2011 04:44 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> And now we have the remaining 2% of gems, which have binary 
> extensions, which unfortunately don't build and needs to be patched. 
> This situation is not covered by the guidelines, but you are right 
> that we should work that out, because this is unfortunate situation 
> for both, package and reviewer. I have met already such situation and 
> I opened the support ticket for this scenario [1], however no 
> reasonable solution were provided.

Yes this is an interesting scenario, though I've never run into it 
myself (at least not as far as I recall).

It could also be the case that the gem compiles fine but the source 
needs to be patched anyways to remove some offending code, such as 
something not licensed under an acceptable license or other.

> I think we should do following steps for such case:
> %prep
> a) Do regular "gem install" in prep section. It is obvious that the 
> gem installation fails, however the gem itself is unpacked in the 
> correct locations.

We would need to run the 'gem install' command appending an  "|| true" 
afterwards so as not to break the build process when gem install fails.

Why not just run "gem unpack %{SOURCE0}" here.


More information about the ruby-sig mailing list