+1 to do this with something like "ruby-packagers-utils"
Providing simple mocks would make packaging easier but could very easily mess up the environment at times especially if I install ruby-devel to build native gems that I download with the gem tool even though we only need (and probably even want it) only in the packaging (mock) environment.
On 09/05/2019 12:17, Jun Aruga wrote:
I agree the intent to create fake libraries for SimpleCov, Coveralls and Bundler. It makes each rubygem package easy and clean. That's good. But ruby-devel is used for the use case to build the rubygem that has a C extension, with ruby.h I think that ruby-devel's "devel" means user's development, not packager's development If we add the fake libraries, users are confused to refer the fake libraries. I assume that the fake libraries are used for the use case of our rpm packaging development only. I would prefer to create new ruby's sub RPM package or separated RPM package such as * "ruby-packagers-utils": inspired from scl-utils or * "ruby-packagers-devel" or * "ruby-packagers-fake-libs" or etc Then each rubygem-foo.spec use like this if it is necessary. rubygem-foo.spec ``` BuildRequires: ruby-packagers-utils ```
_______________________________________________ ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
