On 17 October 2016 at 11:42, Panu Matilainen <pmati...@laiskiainen.org> wrote: > On 10/17/2016 12:30 PM, Thierry Vignaud wrote: >> >> On 17 October 2016 at 10:10, Panu Matilainen <pmati...@laiskiainen.org> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> What is the chance to get [1, 2] into the release? I mildly remember, >>>> that once I was offered to get this patch into Fedora, but that never >>>> materialized and now it is almost a year. I don't think this is >>>> controversial change which should make anything break. >>>> >>>> Thx for considering. >>>> >>>> >>>> Vít >>>> >>>> >>>> [1] https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/27 >>>> [2] >>>> >>>> >>>> https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/commit/89d1dd0a7c63c7497d334e9f240ce7e36ca89434 >>> >>> >>> >>> Hmm, that has actually been in Mageia for over a year so it's certainly >>> gotten its share of soak-time (so at least it's not breaking anything >>> else) >>> and people are probably depending on it in Mageia so it'd be a reasonable >>> candidate. >> >> >> Actually, it's been here at least in Mageia from much more earlier: >> >> http://svnweb.mageia.org/packages/cauldron/rpm/current/SOURCES/rpm-4.6.1-setup-rubygems.patch?view=markup&pathrev=343 >> >> I think the original patch went in in October 2010, previously we were >> using a separate %gem_unpack macro >> >> But it's not the same implementation as the one that has been merged >> in master. Mageia one is: >> >> http://svnweb.mageia.org/packages/cauldron/rpm/current/SOURCES/rpm-4.12.90-setup-rubygems.patch?revision=860276&view=markup > > > Oh, I wasn't aware there were two implementations, I just assumed its the > same implementation. Thanks for pointing this out, but it does mean the > upstream implementation is not real-world tested so its not 4.13.0 material. > In this circumstance anyway. Such minor enhancements are perfectly welcome > in 4.13.1 though once we get there. > >> >> But if it works the same, Mageia will be happy to drop one more patch :-) > > > Since you obviously have existing users for the feature, please test the > upstream patch with your packages and see what if anything is > missing/broken. Me, I've no clue about Ruby business :)
@Pascal: could you run an autobuild (http://pkgsubmit.mageia.org/autobuild/) with 2 packages from a custom repo/medium? You would need the following packages: - rpm: just replace Patch2006 with 0001-Add-RubyGems-support.patch generated by running: git clone https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm.git git format-patch 89d1dd0a7c63c7~1..89d1dd0a7c63c7 - ruby-RubyGems (apply rubygems.macros.diff to SOURCE1:rubygems.macros) (patch is in the previous mail I CC:ed you) Then if all packages build smoothly, we can as well switch to the upstream patch You could restrict the autobuild to ruby* packages in order to speed it up. WDYT? _______________________________________________ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint