On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Erik Hollensbe <e...@hollensbe.org> wrote:
> As callous as this sounds, this actually doesn't solve anything. The proof > is in your examples -- they're a part of the standard library for the > respective platforms. > Yep, you're right. Was grasping for tools at the end of the day to solve it quickly, could tell that it wasn't listing all loaded libraries, and shouldn't have hit send on that. Understand that otool and ldd are not looking at libraries loaded dynamically in rubygems, etc., so sorry about that. The intention in the beginning was to try to discourage just using metadata because that looks nasty. If a gem can extend Gem::Specification to add additional methods like add_native_runtime_dependency, etc. then problems with missing dependencies can be caught at the same time as the rest rather than having to use something else later that looks at Gem::Specification.metadata. Maybe that isn't a good idea, though. _______________________________________________ RubyGems-Developers mailing list http://rubyforge.org/projects/rubygems RubyGems-Developers@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
