On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 10:23:41PM +0200, Christian Boltz wrote: > you might have noticed the discussion about the libapparmor ruby > bindings build failures on openSUSE Factory, which is the first version > with ruby 2.0. > > The problem was that DESTDIR was added to too many variables, which > finally resulted in > > [ 1399s] make[4]: Entering directory > `/home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/apparmor-2.8.1/libraries/libapparmor/swig/ruby' > [ 1399s] make[4]: *** No rule to make target > `/home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/apparmor-2.8.1-147.1.x86_64/usr/include/ruby-2.0.0/ruby.h',
Well. I'm thoroughly confused, based on experiments on Ubuntu. One, ruby.h doesn't get built here. Two, I applied this patch on ubuntu 13.04 and got no actual differences in install locations when installing the ruby bits. The resultant Makefile.ruby changes looked like so: --- Makefile.ruby.old 2013-06-11 12:40:19.000000000 -0700 +++ Makefile.ruby.new 2013-06-11 12:39:42.000000000 -0700 @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ exec_prefix = $(prefix) vendorhdrdir = $(rubyhdrdir)/vendor_ruby sitehdrdir = $(rubyhdrdir)/site_ruby -rubyhdrdir = $(includedir)/$(RUBY_BASE_NAME)-$(ruby_version) +rubyhdrdir = $(oldincludedir)/$(RUBY_BASE_NAME)-$(ruby_version) vendordir = $(DESTDIR)/usr/lib/ruby/vendor_ruby sitedir = $(DESTDIR)/usr/local/lib/site_ruby ridir = $(datarootdir)/$(RI_BASE_NAME) @@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ htmldir = $(docdir) infodir = $(prefix)/share/info docdir = $(datarootdir)/doc/$(PACKAGE) -oldincludedir = $(DESTDIR)/usr/include +oldincludedir = /usr/include includedir = $(prefix)/include localstatedir = $(DESTDIR)/var sharedstatedir = $(prefix)/com but since at least in ruby 1.8 and ruby 1.9 we're not generating a header, I guess that's why I'm not seeing any difference. I am confused why he chose to modify oldincludedir and convert rubyhdrdir (or hdrdir under SUSE?) to use it (I'm not sure what oldincludedir's intended usage is, either). Finally, Ubuntu doesn't package the ruby bits (though I would like to change that at some point). So I think the patch is safe from an Ubuntu perspective for ruby 1.8 and 1.9 (and I don't know when ruby 2.0 is coming into the distro). So I'm not terribly opposed to the patch going in if it fixes an actual build problem for openSUSE. Could you add a reference to the bug in a comment before the rewriting occurs to give some explanation why it is done? With that addition, Acked-by: Steve Beattie <[email protected]>. Thanks. -- Steve Beattie <[email protected]> http://NxNW.org/~steve/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- AppArmor mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/apparmor
