Dne 11. 11. 20 v 9:35 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Anyway, thinking about this boostrap project over night and thinking about this question, I think that my next step should be trying to use the miniruby after `make clean`, which should bring the tarball content closer to upstream repository. I'll see what more is needed to build Ruby and I might consider reporting my findings upstream. But I am afraid this will require more time then I can spend on this.
So here is the next step: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ruby/pull-request/72 https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/vondruch/rpms/ruby/c/ecc88a455f7ffdfd3cd1012bfbb3c98e00219994So it is doable. I am still undecided, if building miniruby is worth of the hassle. Building full Ruby could shorten these ~35 lines [1] into `make` line. The downside would be slightly longer build time. The upside would be probably bigger robustness. I'll try that as a next step.
Vít [1]: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ruby/pull-request/72#_2__65-101
OpenPGP_0x0CE09EE79917B87C.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
