(Moving the discussion to debian-ruby@. Context: https://github.com/ln/gem2deb/pull/19)
On 09/04/11 at 06:49 -0700, lbt wrote: > Hmm, so what's the point of gem2deb ? > I inferred : "The best packaging possible with the information available - > minimise manual tweaking" > So if you put them in a comment you guarantee they're not used.and hence > FTBFS in a clean environment. OTOH, the package will refuse to install if some libraries are manually installed. > As you improve the "just add ruby-" in front algorithm then less work is > required. > > Oh, and they're not guessed :) .... the names are guessed but they represent > the upstream statement of dependencies. ... which might be wrong. > In the future, if the naming is such an issue and policy rules are not tight > enough then maybe even provide a debian gem exception naming service > (http://git.debian.org/git/pkg-ruby-extras/naming-exceptions) or a > gem2deb-naming-exceptions.deb package? > > FYIW: https://build.pub.meego.com/project/monitor?project=home%3Albt%3Arails > is where I used this patch to pull in recursivley all the gems for rails - so > far it's doing all right.... (hoe/minitest is circular) I think that a compromise solution is needed. Could you provide a patch that adds an option that, when enabled, auto-fills Build-Depends and Depends, and when not enabled, adds the same information as a content before those fields? Would that work for you? - Lucas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
