From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JfqDd-00060c-Mf for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 30 Mar 2008 05:36:37 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 34363E0557; Sun, 30 Mar 2008 05:36:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09925E0557 for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2008 05:36:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gentoo.org (c-71-193-142-160.hsd1.or.comcast.net [71.193.142.160]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1892C66B7B; Sun, 30 Mar 2008 05:36:35 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 22:36:31 -0700 From: Donnie Berkholz To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org, rbrown@gentoo.org Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-ruby/rubygems: ChangeLog rubygems-1.1.0-r0.ebuild Message-ID: <20080330053631.GB24954@comet.had1.or.comcast.net> References: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-Archives-Salt: 3b4a2a52-d894-4ed3-aedd-558ac1dc15f9 X-Archives-Hash: d99c9ba4440e19316780050f1585d010 On 15:16 Sat 29 Mar , Richard Brown (rbrown) wrote: > 1.1 dev-ruby/rubygems/rubygems-1.1.0-r0.ebuild > > file : http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo-x86/dev-ruby/rubygems/rubygems-1.1.0-r0.ebuild?rev=1.1&view=markup > plain: http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo-x86/dev-ruby/rubygems/rubygems-1.1.0-r0.ebuild?rev=1.1&content-type=text/plain > > Index: rubygems-1.1.0-r0.ebuild What was the purpose of bumping this to an -r0? I didn't see any previous rubygems ebuilds doing this. I'm probably wrong about this, but my naive impression is that it looks to me like an attempt to force someone else to bring up the issue that indeed did come up, rather than doing it yourself. > dosym /usr/bin/gem18 /usr/bin/gem || die "dosym gem failed" No big deal, but it would be nice to do a relative symlink here. > #This is used to update rubygems, do not want. > rm "${D}/usr/bin/update_rubygems18" > > dodoc README > if use examples; then > cp -pPR examples "${D}/usr/share/doc/${PF}" > fi > > cp "${FILESDIR}/auto_gem.rb" "${D}"/$(${RUBY} -r rbconfig -e 'print Config::CONFIG["sitedir"]') > doenvd "${FILESDIR}/10rubygems" > > if use server; then > newinitd "${FILESDIR}/init.d-gem_server" gem_server > newconfd "${FILESDIR}/conf.d-gem_server" gem_server > fi Might be nice to die if some of these fail. > } > > pkg_postinst() > { > ver=$(${RUBY} -r rbconfig -e 'print Config::CONFIG["ruby_version"]') Shouldn't this be preserved in the environment from src_install()? Rerunning it seems like it could allow a change in ruby version to cause issues. Thanks, Donnie -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list