Re: "gem unpack" support in RPM's %setup macro

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 10.11.2015 v 17:35 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> Dne 10.11.2015 v 16:09 Troy Dawson napsal(a):
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 8:52 AM, Vít Ondruch > > wrote:
>>
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> For a long time, I thought that it would be interesting to have .gem
>> expansion support in %setup macro. This would simply our .spec
>> files a
>> bit. Finally, I gave a go to this idea and proposed this to RPM
>> upstream
>> [1]. Please let me know (preferably via the PR) if you can
>> foresee any
>> issues with this approach.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>> Vít
>>
>>
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/27
>> ___
>> ruby-sig mailing list
>> ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> 
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig
>>
>>
>> Hi Vit,
>> I think this is a great idea.  Since the instructions for prep of
>> rubygems have settled down for a couple years I think now is the time
>> to do it.
>>
>> I do have one question.
>> If I am reading the code right you have the equivalent of
>> {gem unpack} SOURCE0 && gem spec SOURCE0 --ruby > {gem_name}.gemspec
>>
>> Why aren't you using the -l in the gem spec portion?
>> Shouldn't it be
>>
>> {gem unpack} SOURCE0 && gem spec SOURCE0 -l --ruby > {gem_name}.gemspec
>>
>> Troy
>>
>>
>
>
> Thank you, that is a good point. I omitted it just by accident. On the
> other hand, what is the practical difference? Not sure. I should
> probably dive a bit into RubyGems code.

The -l aka --local is in default option set:

  Defaults:
--local --version '>= 0' --yaml

Not sure what would be the advantage to put the -l there explicitly.
Lets keep it without -l.


Vít
___
ruby-sig mailing list
ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig

Re: "gem unpack" support in RPM's %setup macro

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 10.11.2015 v 17:31 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> Dne 10.11.2015 v 15:52 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> For a long time, I thought that it would be interesting to have .gem
>> expansion support in %setup macro. This would simply our .spec files a
>> bit. Finally, I gave a go to this idea and proposed this to RPM upstream
>> [1]. Please let me know (preferably via the PR) if you can foresee any
>> issues with this approach.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>> Vít
>>
>>
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/27
> Just as an example, this would be the .spec file difference for
> rubygem-sqlite3:
>
>
>
> $ git diff
> diff --git a/rubygem-sqlite3.spec b/rubygem-sqlite3.spec
> index 5f98c93..a2df0cd 100644
> --- a/rubygem-sqlite3.spec
> +++ b/rubygem-sqlite3.spec
> @@ -34,15 +34,12 @@ BuildArch: noarch
>  Documentation for %{name}
>  
>  %prep
> -gem unpack %{SOURCE0}
> -%setup -q -D -T -n  %{gem_name}-%{version}
> +%setup -q -n %{gem_name}-%{version}
>  
>  %patch0 -p1
>  
> -gem spec %{SOURCE0} -l --ruby > %{gem_name}.gemspec
> -
>  %build
> -gem build %{gem_name}.gemspec
> +gem build ../%{gem_name}-%{version}.gemspec
>  %gem_install
>  
>  %install
>
>

And I forgot to add that one of advantages I see is that in contrast to
current guidelines, the .gemspec is created on the same level as the
unpacked directory and this avoids overwriting of .gemspec in case it is
shipped in the original package.


Vít
___
ruby-sig mailing list
ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig

Re: "gem unpack" support in RPM's %setup macro

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 10.11.2015 v 16:09 Troy Dawson napsal(a):
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 8:52 AM, Vít Ondruch  > wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
>
> For a long time, I thought that it would be interesting to have .gem
> expansion support in %setup macro. This would simply our .spec files a
> bit. Finally, I gave a go to this idea and proposed this to RPM
> upstream
> [1]. Please let me know (preferably via the PR) if you can foresee any
> issues with this approach.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> Vít
>
>
>
> [1] https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/27
> ___
> ruby-sig mailing list
> ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig
>
>
> Hi Vit,
> I think this is a great idea.  Since the instructions for prep of
> rubygems have settled down for a couple years I think now is the time
> to do it.
>
> I do have one question.
> If I am reading the code right you have the equivalent of
> {gem unpack} SOURCE0 && gem spec SOURCE0 --ruby > {gem_name}.gemspec
>
> Why aren't you using the -l in the gem spec portion?
> Shouldn't it be
>
> {gem unpack} SOURCE0 && gem spec SOURCE0 -l --ruby > {gem_name}.gemspec
>
> Troy
>
>


Thank you, that is a good point. I omitted it just by accident. On the
other hand, what is the practical difference? Not sure. I should
probably dive a bit into RubyGems code.


Vít
___
ruby-sig mailing list
ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig

Re: "gem unpack" support in RPM's %setup macro

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 10.11.2015 v 15:52 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> Hi guys,
>
> For a long time, I thought that it would be interesting to have .gem
> expansion support in %setup macro. This would simply our .spec files a
> bit. Finally, I gave a go to this idea and proposed this to RPM upstream
> [1]. Please let me know (preferably via the PR) if you can foresee any
> issues with this approach.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> Vít
>
>
>
> [1] https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/27

Just as an example, this would be the .spec file difference for
rubygem-sqlite3:



$ git diff
diff --git a/rubygem-sqlite3.spec b/rubygem-sqlite3.spec
index 5f98c93..a2df0cd 100644
--- a/rubygem-sqlite3.spec
+++ b/rubygem-sqlite3.spec
@@ -34,15 +34,12 @@ BuildArch: noarch
 Documentation for %{name}
 
 %prep
-gem unpack %{SOURCE0}
-%setup -q -D -T -n  %{gem_name}-%{version}
+%setup -q -n %{gem_name}-%{version}
 
 %patch0 -p1
 
-gem spec %{SOURCE0} -l --ruby > %{gem_name}.gemspec
-
 %build
-gem build %{gem_name}.gemspec
+gem build ../%{gem_name}-%{version}.gemspec
 %gem_install
 
 %install

___
ruby-sig mailing list
ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig

Re: "gem unpack" support in RPM's %setup macro

[Troy Dawson]

On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 8:52 AM, Vít Ondruch  wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> For a long time, I thought that it would be interesting to have .gem
> expansion support in %setup macro. This would simply our .spec files a
> bit. Finally, I gave a go to this idea and proposed this to RPM upstream
> [1]. Please let me know (preferably via the PR) if you can foresee any
> issues with this approach.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> Vít
>
>
>
> [1] https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/27
> ___
> ruby-sig mailing list
> ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig


Hi Vit,
I think this is a great idea.  Since the instructions for prep of rubygems
have settled down for a couple years I think now is the time to do it.

I do have one question.
If I am reading the code right you have the equivalent of
{gem unpack} SOURCE0 && gem spec SOURCE0 --ruby > {gem_name}.gemspec

Why aren't you using the -l in the gem spec portion?
Shouldn't it be

{gem unpack} SOURCE0 && gem spec SOURCE0 -l --ruby > {gem_name}.gemspec

Troy
___
ruby-sig mailing list
ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig