[email protected] Bcc: Subject: Re: [DRE-maint] Rubygems Reply-To: In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On 28/07/09 at 02:23 -0700, Yehuda Katz wrote: > On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 2:01 AM, Lucas Nussbaum > <[email protected]>wrote: > > (Added a Cc on [email protected], some interested people > > might not be subscribed to pkg-ruby-maintainers) > > > > Hi, > > > > First, thank you for contacting us on that topic. > > > > On 28/07/09 at 00:56 -0700, Yehuda Katz wrote: > > > Hey guys, > > > I recently read your position on Rubygems. I think we can probably find a > > > way to solve the problem if we can get some help from Debian. > > > > > > It seems to me like you have the following problems: > > > > > > 1) People have libraries that rely on Rubygems. I agree with this issue: > > > http://yehudakatz.com/2009/07/24/rubygems-good-practice/ > > > > > > 2) You want a simple way to install packages without needing the full > > > rubygems. To be honest, while you can appeal to the community to provide > > > setup.rb, it would in fact be easier for us to provide you with a tiny > > > subset of rubygems that can help you extract the installation information > > > from the gem specification. You can then find the bin directories, as > > well > > > as instructions for installing any binary gems. This will enable you to > > > install the parts of the gem where you want, and make it trivial to make > > > debian packages from rubygems. I would be willing to write something that > > > could serve as the base for a Rubygems=>Debian package converter if one > > does > > > not already exist. > > > > The point of setup.rb is that it enforces a layout that is sane. Of > > course, the same could be achieved by looking into the gem specification > > to extract the relevant info, as you suggested. I'm not very familiar > > with rubygems, but I have the impression that this solution might not > > apply to all current gems: it will still require a special organization > > of the files inside the gem to work. Can you give an example of the > > information from the gem spec that we will be able to use? > > Would it be acceptable to have the gem's lib directory inside another > directory? What are the exact requirements for how a gem needs to be > installed on the system? >From a Debian POV, we prefer to have as much stuff as possible done by the upstream build system, so we don't have to build our own build system on top of upstream's (which is fragile, obviously). Ideally, there would be a "gem-to-FHS-installer" script that would allow to copy binaries, library files, etc to locations specified on the command line (you should not assume that we want them in any specific location ; during the package build, files are copied to subdirectories of the debian/ dir anyway). Currently, the layout of the rubygems1.8 package is as follows: $ dpkg -L rubygems1.8 /. /etc /etc/bash_completion.d /etc/bash_completion.d/gem1.8 /usr /usr/bin /usr/bin/gem1.8 /usr/lib /usr/lib/ruby /usr/lib/ruby/1.8 /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/gauntlet_rubygems.rb /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/rbconfig /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/rbconfig/datadir.rb /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/rubygems /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/rubygems/builder.rb [...] /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/rubygems/version_option.rb /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/rubygems.rb /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/ubygems.rb /usr/share /usr/share/doc /usr/share/doc/rubygems1.8 /usr/share/doc/rubygems1.8/README /usr/share/doc/rubygems1.8/README.Debian /usr/share/doc/rubygems1.8/copyright /usr/share/doc/rubygems1.8/changelog.gz /usr/share/doc/rubygems1.8/changelog.Debian.gz /usr/share/man /usr/share/man/man1 /usr/share/man/man1/gem1.8.1.gz /var /var/lib /var/lib/gems /var/lib/gems/1.8 -- | Lucas Nussbaum | [email protected] http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: [email protected] GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | _______________________________________________ Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers
