gem2rpm and Ruby 1.9

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 30.1.2012 14:57, TASAKA Mamoru napsal(a):
> Vít Ondruch wrote, at 01/30/2012 05:19 PM +9:00:
>> Dne 30.1.2012 07:22, Bohuslav Kabrda napsal(a):
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> On Monday, January 23, 2012 05:31:32 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
>>>>> Dne 13.1.2012 02:59, Michael Stahnke napsal(a):
>>>>>> Has gem2rpm been updated for the Ruby 1.9 changes? The
>>>>>> guidelines
>>>>>> seem quite a bit different, an the gem2rpm macros in the current
>>>>>> state
>>>>>> (at least on EL6) don't map up. Things like
>>>>>>
>>>>>> %gemdir rather than %gem_dir.
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> ruby-sig mailing list
>>>>>> ruby-sig at lists.fedoraproject.org
>>>>>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig
>>>>> Hi everybody,
>>>>>
>>>>> I have released gem2rpm 0.8.0 today (with great help of Bohuslav
>>>>> Kabrda), which supports new guidelines for Ruby 1.9.3 and Fedora
>>>>> 17. You
>>>>> can grab the gem from rubygems.org or get updated RPM version of
>>>>> gem
>>>>> from updates-testing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please note that if you want to generate the .spec on some OS other
>>>>> than
>>>>> F17, you have to use "-t fedora-17-rawhide" parameter on your
>>>>> command
>>>>> line, which specifies the correct template. On F17, the F17
>>>>> template
>>>>> will be picked up automagically.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any feedback is welcomed.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Vit
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> Will 1.9.3 be pushed into rawhide soon? I'm starting to push new
>>>> rubygems into
>>>> rawhide but am afaid of conflicting 1.9.3. I'm still based off 1.8
>>>> for rawhide
>>>> doesn't have this landed yet.
>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> ruby-sig mailing list
>>>>> ruby-sig at lists.fedoraproject.org
>>>>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> ruby-sig mailing list
>>>> ruby-sig at lists.fedoraproject.org
>>>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig
>>> Hi Shawn,
>>> we have a special Koji target named f17-ruby, which will be merged 
>>> into rawhide just before branching to f17 (somewhere around February 
>>> 6). For instructions on how to work with that, please se [1].
>>>
>>
>> Shawn, yes, please build your package against (and only) the tag 
>> mentioned above.
>> You will save your/ours time with rebuild. Please make sure that all 
>> your dependencies
>> are built there [1] prior building you packages.
>>
>>
>> Vit
>>
>>
>> [1] 
>> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/builds?start=0&tagID=199&order=-build_id&inherited=0&latest=1
>
> Note that if you update (existing) package on f15(updates-testing),
> f16(updates-testing), and f17-ruby, and without f17, you will get
> "broken upgrade path" report from bodhi until f17-ruby packages get
> tagged into f17, because bodhi checks f15(updates-testing),
> f16(updates-testing), f17 but not f17-ruby. If you don't want to
> get this noisy report, you should once build a package against f17,
> bump release, and next build against f17-ruby.
>
> Regards,
> Mamoru
>

You are right, I did not realized that. Thank you for pointing it out. 
However, since the f17-ruby will be merged into rawhide approximately in 
a week, I don't think the build for f17 is worth of the effort (unless 
somebody beets me to take some action ;).


Vit