Your message dated Wed, 19 Apr 2017 15:50:38 -0300 with message-id <[email protected]> and subject line Re: Bug#860747: dh_ruby: please inject versioned dependency on ruby metapackage has caused the Debian Bug report #860747, regarding dh_ruby: please inject versioned dependency on ruby metapackage to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected] immediately.) -- 860747: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=860747 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---Package: gem2deb Version: 0.33.1 Severity: normal Please have compiled Ruby extensions depend on compatible versions of the ruby metapackage; for instance, an extension built only for 2.3 would depend on ruby (>= 2.3), ruby (<< 2.4), and an extension built for both 2.3 and 2.4 would depend on ruby (>= 2.3), ruby (<< 2.5). (Python packaging settled on an analogous approach some time ago.) Ideally, this dependency would go to a dedicated ${ruby:Depends} substvar, but adding it to ${misc:Depends} would allow for much faster adoption. As it stands, we can get situations like #860512, in which the m68k build of telegram-desktop failed because ruby 2.3 wound up paired with a ruby-fast-xs installation that only covered 2.2. (The 0.8.0-3+b2 m68k binNMU was intended to add 2.3 support, but accidentally picked up old metapackages.) With an explicit versioned dependency in place, generic automated tools would have caught this problem. Thanks! -- Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (amu at alum.mit.edu, ucko at debian.org) http://www.mit.edu/~amu/ | http://stuff.mit.edu/cgi/finger/[email protected]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 01:42:39PM -0400, Aaron M. Ucko wrote: > Package: gem2deb > Version: 0.33.1 > Severity: normal > > Please have compiled Ruby extensions depend on compatible versions of > the ruby metapackage; for instance, an extension built only for 2.3 > would depend on ruby (>= 2.3), ruby (<< 2.4), and an extension built > for both 2.3 and 2.4 would depend on ruby (>= 2.3), ruby (<< 2.5). > (Python packaging settled on an analogous approach some time ago.) > Ideally, this dependency would go to a dedicated ${ruby:Depends} > substvar, but adding it to ${misc:Depends} would allow for much faster > adoption. > > As it stands, we can get situations like #860512, in which the m68k > build of telegram-desktop failed because ruby 2.3 wound up paired with > a ruby-fast-xs installation that only covered 2.2. (The 0.8.0-3+b2 > m68k binNMU was intended to add 2.3 support, but accidentally picked > up old metapackages.) With an explicit versioned dependency in place, > generic automated tools would have caught this problem. That is already the case: $ apt-cache show ruby-fast-xs | grep 'Architecture:\|Depends' Architecture: amd64 Depends: libc6 (>= 2.2.5), libgmp10, libruby2.3 (>= 2.3.0~preview2), ruby (>= 1:2.3~0) ruby-fast-xs is broken on m68k because it is a very old binary, from before this was implemented, and AFAICT it can't be built anymore because something else is not available.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--- End Message ---
_______________________________________________ Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers
