Re: gem2rpm and upgrades of existing rpms

Dne 25.6.2014 16:15, Joe Rafaniello napsal(a): - Original Message - - Original Message - Dne 24.6.2014 20:47, Joe Rafaniello napsal(a): - Original Message - On 06/23/2014 09:58 PM, Joe Rafaniello wrote: If gem2rpm could handle both initial and updates to the spec,

Re: RSpec 3

Dne 27.6.2014 16:31, Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): Julian C. Dunn wrote, at 06/27/2014 11:00 PM +9:00: Hi again, I’ve been packaging more and more stuff that is using RSpec 3 in test suites. We currently have RSpec 2.14.1 even in rawhide. Is anyone working on an upgrade? Or providing RSpec 3 in p

Re: Update status on isitifedoraruby

Dne 8.7.2014 20:00, Achilleas Pipinellis napsal(a): Hey there, I thought some of you might want to check how the refactoring of isitfedoraruby goes. Here's a short changelog for the previous month. - Remove unused code (sorry Mo...) - Remove HistoricalGems model - Remove Build controller/

Re: Update status on isitifedoraruby

Dne 9.7.2014 10:44, Achilleas Pipinellis napsal(a): On 07/09/2014 11:00 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: Dne 8.7.2014 20:00, Achilleas Pipinellis napsal(a): Hey there, I thought some of you might want to check how the refactoring of isitfedoraruby goes. Here's a short changelog for the previous

Re: gem-compare: A new tool for tracking upstream changes

Seems to be missing Bundler dependency, required by gemnasium-parser: $ gem compare --help ERROR: Loading command: compare (LoadError) cannot load such file -- bundler ERROR: While executing gem ... (NoMethodError) undefined method `invoke_with_build_args' for nil:NilClass But otherw

ruby-debug19 future?

Hi Mamoru, What is your plan about ruby-debug19 and associated packages? They don't look maintained upstream. Isn't this right time to drop them from Fedora? Just wondering Vít ___ ruby-sig mailing list ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org https:/

Re: Github common namespace for Fedora Ruby projects

JFTR, Achilleas went ahead and moved isitfedoraruby under common namespace at GH: https://github.com/fedora-ruby and he was already followed by some other projects/tools. If you have other (mainly) Fedora or Fedora's Ruby SIG related stuff or you'd like to help, please ask for invitation, which w

Re: Help on some ruby package for EPEL/Fedora

Hi Michael, thanks for taking care about them. Dne 30.8.2014 00:34, Michael Stahnke napsal(a): > In a week or so I'll orphan the ones I have no interest > in if nobody else picks up co-maintainership. > > If there will be some packages remaining, feel free to reassign their Fedora branches to me

Re: RSpec 3

Dne 27.6.2014 16:31, Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): > Julian C. Dunn wrote, at 06/27/2014 11:00 PM +9:00: >> Hi again, >> >> I’ve been packaging more and more stuff that is using RSpec 3 in test >> suites. We currently have RSpec 2.14.1 even in rawhide. >> Is anyone working on an upgrade? Or providing R

Re: RSpec 3

Dne 2.9.2014 15:32, Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): > > https://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rspec3/ > What is this good for: Provides: rubygem(%{rpmgem_name}) = %{version}-%{release} Especially where does the %{rpmgem_name} come from? Am I missing something? Vít _

Ruby 2.2

Hi everybody, Since Ruby 2.2 is going to be released during Christmas and -preview1 release is imminent (this Wednesday?), it is probably time to start looking into its packaging. So here is the updated .spec file [1] and scratch build [2], which can be finally build on all platforms. Sorry, no Co

gem2rpm has new home

Hi everybody, gem2rpm upstream repository was recently moved to fedora-ruby namespace at GH [1] thanks to David. Vít [1] https://github.com/fedora-ruby/gem2rpm ___ ruby-sig mailing list ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.o

Re: Ruby 2.2

Hi František, Thanks for testing! Dne 5.10.2014 v 21:17 František Dvořák napsal(a): > Hi, > > On Mon, 2014-09-15 at 17:38 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Hi everybody, >> >> Since Ruby 2.2 is going to be released during Christmas and -preview1 >> release is

Re: Ruby 2.2

I just pushed spec file updated to r47902 into SCM. The scratch build is available here: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7858396 Vít Dne 15.9.2014 v 17:38 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Hi everybody, > > Since Ruby 2.2 is going to be released during Christmas and

Re: updating jruby in fedora

Hi Mo, Thanks for looking into JRuby again. I forwarded your reviews to our Java guys, they will hopefully take care about them :) Vít Dne 14.10.2014 v 13:29 Mo Morsi napsal(a): > Greetings, we're currently looking at fixing the broken JRuby build > and updating it to the latest release in r

Re: Ruby 2.2

Dne 5.10.2014 v 21:17 František Dvořák napsal(a): > rpmlint returns some messages. Bad thing may be the "evil" permissions > 0666 on /usr/share/gems/specifications/*.gemspec. > Submitted patch for this specific issue: https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/10383 And a few others along the way: https

Re: Ruby 2.2

I just pushed r47940 into dist-git and this is the scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7874332 It addresses some of the rpmlint issues, notably the .gemspec permissions noticed by František. Vít ___ ruby-sig mailing list

Re: Building Ruby 2.2

Hi Christopher, Dne 18.10.2014 v 07:50 Christopher Rigor napsal(a): > Hi, > > I tried installing ruby2.2.0preview1 on fedora21 using a repo I found > on this list [1] but ran into some errors. I was able to install ruby > 2.2.0preview1 on centos7 using this repo [2] > > Error: Package: rubygem-io

Re: rspec-its

As far as I understand, its should not be used at all: https://gist.github.com/myronmarston/4503509 But not everybody is probably convinced, so if it is maintained upstream and you are willing to maintain it, then I see no problem to introduce this package into Fedora. Vít Dne 24.10.2014 v

Re: rspec-its

Dne 27.10.2014 v 09:23 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > As far as I understand, its should not be used at all: "its syntax" should read better :) Vít > > https://gist.github.com/myronmarston/4503509 > > But not everybody is probably convinced, so if it is maintained upstream

Re: rspec 3.1.x in rawhide

Dne 10.11.2014 v 14:59 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): > Hello, all > > After a long delay I finally pushed rspec 3.1.x into rawhide > (F-22) build tree. Also I pushed rubygem-rspec2 (and so on) > into rawhide tree. Thank you for the great work (and Josef for reviews)! > > So: > - If your srpm already h

Re: rspec 3.1.x in rawhide

Dne 10.11.2014 v 16:49 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): > Hello,Vít: > > Vít Ondruch wrote on 11/10/2014 11:32 PM: >> BTW, what is the reason for >> Source1:rubygem-%{gem_name}-%{version}-full.tar.gz > > It seems that rspec series 3.x gem no longer contains > spec/ dire

Re: Ruby 2.2

Hi, I've pushed .spec file updated to r48365 into dist-git. Associated scratch build is available here: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8091422 As always, please test and let me (or upstream) know about any issues you'd encounter. Vít

Re: Bundler update and fixes to solve Bundler dependencies

And one additional remark, there is bug in Bundler with RubyGems 2.2+. It does not clean the load path properly. Hopefully upstream will soon accept the patch [1] fixing this issue. Vít [1] https://github.com/bundler/bundler/pull/3237 Dne 12.11.2014 v 15:25 Josef Stribny napsal(a): > Hi all,

Re: Ruby 2.2

And yet another update to r48476. And here is the Koji build (but I have no more patience to wait for ARM, so I hope it is not stuck somewhere ;)): http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8177839 BTW I made a little script which can prepare an upstream tarball and update the ruby.spec

Re: Ruby 2.2

Dne 19.11.2014 v 00:39 Ken Dreyer napsal(a): > On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:08 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> BTW I made a little script which can prepare an upstream tarball and >> update the ruby.spec a bit, not sure where to put it yet and what will >> be the future, so this i

Re: rspec 3.1.x in rawhide

Dne 10.11.2014 v 14:59 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): > - Or not, you can use BuildRequires(rspec2). Note that > 2.x version rspec (script) is renamed to %_bindir/rspec2, > you'll probably have to do > $ rspec2 spec/ > for example. > > Used the rspec2 command for the first time, I have strange f

Re: rspec 3.1.x in rawhide

Dne 2.12.2014 v 13:41 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): > Vít Ondruch wrote on 11/28/2014 08:15 PM: >> Dne 10.11.2014 v 14:59 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): >>> - Or not, you can use BuildRequires(rspec2). Note that >>>2.x version rspec (script) is renamed to %_bindir/rspec2, >

Re: rspec 3.1.x in rawhide

Dne 2.12.2014 v 15:24 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): >> So the correct way is to specify core, expectations, mocks all >> versions to "~> 2.14.0" in /usr/bin/rspec2 >> (fixed in rubygem-rspec2-core-2.14.8-4.fc22), and we don't expect >> that rspec _2.14.8_ really

Re: Ruby 2.2

Hi rubyists, I have pushed update to Ruby 2.2.0-preview2 into dist-git. Here is associated scratch build (if it succeeds ;). http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8278345 Please let me know about any issue you possibly encounter. Vít _

Re: Ruby 2.2

Yet another update in dist-git, this time to Ruby 2.2 r48741. Here is the scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8323070 The build failure on ARM is already reported to upstream. Vít ___ ruby-sig mailing list ruby-sig@lists.

Ruby 2.2 change proposal

Hi rubyists, I put together change proposal for Ruby 2.2 in Fedora 22 [1]. Any feedback is welcome. If no feedback, I'll propose this change to package wrangler in a week or so ... Vít [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Ruby_2.2 ___ ruby-sig

Re: Continuous integration with Koschei

Dne 15.12.2014 v 20:50 Ken Dreyer napsal(a): > This looks like it would be a great resource for the Ruby SIG, > particularly with the tight version coupling I see in a lot of > gemspecs. > > http://blog.famillecollet.com/post/2014/08/12/Koschei-continuous-integration-of-PHP-stack-in-Fedora > > I se

Re: Ruby 2.2

I just pushed update of upcoming Ruby 2.2 package into dist git. This time it is updated to r48879. Here [1] is the associated build (yes, ARM failed, but I'd expect that second round would pass, feel free to make your own build in case you want to experiment on ARM). I dropped the release back to

DBM build against gdbm?

Hi, The DBM module of Ruby [1] used to be built against db4 and later against libdb packages. However, for some while already, it is compatible even with gdbm. I'm thinking about dropping the BuildRequires: libdb-devel and keep just the BuildRequires: gdbm-devel (this is used for GDBM module anywa

Re: Ruby 2.2 change proposal

I have flipped the switch. The change is now ChangeReadyForWrangler and waiting for review/announcement. Vít Dne 9.12.2014 v 12:43 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Hi rubyists, > > I put together change proposal for Ruby 2.2 in Fedora 22 [1]. Any > feedback is welcome. If no feedback,

Re: Ruby 2.2 - RC1

Hi everybody. RC1 was released yesterday [1] and here is test build for you: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8437177 Please also note that not only the RC1 was released, but the Ruby 2.2 was branched into ruby_2_2. And there are also some small changes in the package: * Sinc

Re: Ruby 2.2.0

Hi, You have probably noticed, that Ruby 2.2.0 was released [1]. I pushed the updated .spec file into dist-git and here is the scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8513231 Enjoy and happy testing. Vít [1] https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/news/2014/12/25/ruby-2-2-0-re

Re: Ruby 2.2.0

Dne 2.1.2015 v 16:41 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Hi, > > You have probably noticed, that Ruby 2.2.0 was released [1]. I pushed > the updated .spec file into dist-git and here is the scratch build: > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8513231 > > Enjoy and

Re: Ruby 2.2.0

keeping pace with upstream releases. > > -Dan > > On Jan 2, 2015 8:41 AM, "Vít Ondruch" <mailto:vondr...@redhat.com>> wrote: > > Hi, > > You have probably noticed, that Ruby 2.2.0 was released [1]. I pushed > the updated .spe

Re: Provides in packages?

Dne 7.1.2015 v 06:07 Ken Dreyer napsal(a): > To answer your question about why we just run "ruby -e > this-long-and-complicated-copypasta" instead of "testrb", see > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/ruby-sig/2014-May/001585.html > . The gems that use rspec do have a much shorter/saner %che

Re: Provides in packages?

Dne 7.1.2015 v 15:59 Ken Dreyer napsal(a): > On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:13 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Dne 7.1.2015 v 06:07 Ken Dreyer napsal(a): >>> To answer your question about why we just run "ruby -e >>> this-long-and-complicated-copypasta&quo

Re: Provides in packages?

Dne 7.1.2015 v 18:22 Allen Hewes napsal(a): >>> Ha, this reminds me that the guidelines should be updated finally. >> Any >>> volunteer? :) >> I didn't realize we hadn't updated the guidelines yet! :) >> >> Here you go: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/489 >> > Ken, > > What's the difference bet

Re: Provides in packages?

Dne 13.1.2015 v 13:14 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): > Vít Ondruch wrote on 01/08/2015 12:30 AM: >> Dne 7.1.2015 v 15:59 Ken Dreyer napsal(a): >>> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:13 AM, Vít Ondruch >>> wrote: >>>> Dne 7.1.2015 v 06:07 Ken Dreyer napsal(a): >>>

Ruby 2.2, Rails 4.2 - Koji build target

Hi all, In preparation for Ruby 2.2 [1] and rebuild of packages with binary extensions, I asked for Koji build target in advance [2] and it is already prepared. So given that FESCo approve the Ruby 2.2 change, I'll start with packages rebuild tomorrow. As soon as Ruby 2.2 is there, I'll appreciate

Re: Ruby 2.2, Rails 4.2 - Koji build target

Dne 14.1.2015 v 12:10 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): > Vít Ondruch wrote on 01/14/2015 05:39 PM: >> Hi all, >> >> In preparation for Ruby 2.2 [1] and rebuild of packages with binary >> extensions, I asked for Koji build target in advance [2] and it is >> already prepared

Re: Ruby 2.2, Rails 4.2 - Koji build target

Dne 14.1.2015 v 12:54 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Dne 14.1.2015 v 12:10 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): >> Vít Ondruch wrote on 01/14/2015 05:39 PM: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> In preparation for Ruby 2.2 [1] and rebuild of packages with binary >>> extensions, I asked f

Re: Ruby 2.2, Rails 4.2 - Koji build target

Dne 15.1.2015 v 01:52 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): > Mamoru TASAKA wrote on 01/14/2015 10:32 PM: >> Vít Ondruch wrote on 01/14/2015 08:55 PM: >>> Dne 14.1.2015 v 12:54 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): >>>> Dne 14.1.2015 v 12:10 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): >>>>> Vít On

Re: Ruby 2.2, Rails 4.2 - Koji build target

Dne 15.1.2015 v 14:02 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): > Vít Ondruch wrote on 01/15/2015 08:56 PM: >> Dne 15.1.2015 v 01:52 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): >>> Mamoru TASAKA wrote on 01/14/2015 10:32 PM: >>>> Vít Ondruch wrote on 01/14/2015 08:55 PM: >>>>> Dne 14.1.2

Re: Ruby 2.2 landed in Rawhide

I almost forgot to give big kudos to Mamoru who this time handled the majority of the rebuild. Vít Dne 20.1.2015 v 16:01 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Hi everybody, > > Just heads up that Ruby 2.2 landed in Rawhide. We tried to rebuild every > package which depends on ruby-devel and l

Ruby 2.2 landed in Rawhide

Hi everybody, Just heads up that Ruby 2.2 landed in Rawhide. We tried to rebuild every package which depends on ruby-devel and libruby.so so most of you should be fine already. Nevertheless, there are still some packages remaining, usually due to other issues then Ruby. Namely, it is (if I have no

Re: Ruby 2.2 landed in Rawhide

Dne 20.1.2015 v 17:44 Jason Rist napsal(a): > On 01/20/2015 08:01 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Hi everybody, >> >> Just heads up that Ruby 2.2 landed in Rawhide. We tried to rebuild every >> package which depends on ruby-devel and libruby.so so most of you should >&

Re: Ruby 2.2 landed in Rawhide

Dne 20.1.2015 v 21:35 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): > Vít Ondruch wrote on 01/21/2015 12:04 AM: >> I almost forgot to give big kudos to Mamoru who this time handled the >> majority of the rebuild. > > One infos: > > * Especially, Config::CONFIG['foo'] is no longer

RDoc 4.2 issue

Hi, During the Ruby 2.2 rebuild, there was Hub package failing [1] with strange error messages: + /usr/lib/rpm/check-buildroot Binary file /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/hub-1.12.1-3.fc22.noarch/usr/share/doc/hub/js/navigation.js.gz matches Binary file /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/hub-1.12.1-3.fc22.no

Ruby 2.3

Hi everybody, I needed to check something in development version of Ruby today, so it was good opportunity to prepare updated package with the latest bits. I'll keep updating the sources in dist git private branch [1]. This should be the scratch build (if it succeeds): http://koji.fedoraproject.o

ruby-2.2.0-5.fc22 is broken

I have not tested enough the ruby-2.2.0-5.fc22 and it does not work properly (it cannot list/load gems). I untagged it from f22, so you should be back to ruby-2.2.0-4.fc22 after repo is regenerated. Sorry for any inconvenience. Vít ___ ruby-sig mailing

Re: ruby-2.2.0-5.fc22 is broken

ruby-2.2.0-6.fc22 should fix the issue hopefully. Vít Dne 4.2.2015 v 13:15 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > I have not tested enough the ruby-2.2.0-5.fc22 and it does not work > properly (it cannot list/load gems). I untagged it from f22, so you > should be back to ruby-2.2.0-4.fc22 afte

Re: abrt reporting of ruby bugs apparently broken

Dne 11.2.2015 v 16:17 Richard Z napsal(a): > Hi, > > it appears that currently abrt in at least F20 and F21 has some trouble > reporting ruby bugs - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1191586 > > This means that a lot of bugs might go unnoticed because they are falsely > marked as duplicat

Re: Ruby 2.3

Hello Rubyists, Another update, this time to r49705. Please find the changes in privare-ruby-2.3 branch in dist git and here is the scratch build for your testing: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9040761 Feedback is welcomed. Vít _

Re: Ruby 2.3

://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/11002 Dne 23.2.2015 v 17:41 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Hello Rubyists, > > Another update, this time to r49705. Please find the changes in > privare-ruby-2.3 branch in dist git and here is the scratch build for > your testing: > > http://koji.f

Re: Ruby 2.3

Yet another update: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9399395 This time, it is r50153. I modified further modified the ruby_version patches and submitted they upstream. Will see if they are accepted. Vít Dne 27.3.2015 v 10:13 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Hi All, > >

Re: Ruby 2.3

Hi Rubyists, I updated yet again private-ruby-2.3 branch dist git and this time it is r50329. You can give a try to this scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9493028 Looking forward to your feedback. Vít ___ ruby-sig mai

Re: Ruby 2.3

Hi All, I updated yet again private-ruby-2.3 branch dist git and this time it is r50427. You can give a try to this scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9657235 Looking forward to your feedback. Vít ___ ruby-sig mailing l

[ANN] gem2rpm 0.11.1

Hi everybody, I just want to let you know that I have released gem2rpm 0.11.1. Here are some highlights: * New helpers for %files section preparation. * Add vagrant templates. * /etc/os-release support. * Add PLD Linux support. * Always add dot at the end of description. * Use non-versioned templ

Re: Ruby 2.3

Hi all, Another snapshot of Ruby is here, this time r50815. You can find the sources in private-ruby-2.3 branch of Ruby's dist-git or play with the scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=10015356 Some notable changes includes: * New (un)bundled net-telnet gem. This is

Re: dnf, jruby, and mock

I would be glad if you could help me to investigate, how to make DNF to prefer MRI over JRuby (use Recommends, Suggests or epoch for that, probably break some bad dependency - there used to be issue with rubygem-json). That is the right solution for the future. And along the way, JRuby is doing ste

Orphaning rubygem-{rack-mount,regin}

Hi all, rubygem-rack-mount and rubygem-regin were originally used by Ruby on Rails for routing, but they were later replaced by rubygem-journey in RoR 3.2, which in turn is now integrated in rails. As both of them are abandoned upstream, the source code is no more available in its original locatio

Action needed - mass rebuild FTBFS

Hi all, There is plenty of packages which failed to build during F23 mass rebuild: http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/mass-rebuild/f23-failures.html If I counted correctly, there is currently 93 ruby packages failing out of 567 failing packages in total. IOW, it is more then 16 % currently fai

Re: dnf, jruby, and mock

Good news guys. If my testing is correct, this should be fixed by [1]. Vít [1] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rubypick-1.1.1-4.fc22 Dne 24.6.2015 v 09:40 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > I would be glad if you could help me to investigate, how to make DNF > to prefer MRI over JRub

Re: Ruby 2.3

Hi everybody, Here is another snapshot of Ruby 2.3: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=10460738 This time it is r51358. You can find the .spec file in dist-git in private-ruby-2.3 branch. One noteworthy change is included RubyGems 2.5, which ships with new resolver. Unfortunatel

Re: [PACKAGING GUIDELINES] missing testrb2 referenced by Test::UNIT in Ruby

Dne 10.8.2015 v 10:58 Yaakov Selkowitz napsal(a): > On Fri, 2015-08-07 at 23:28 +0300, Ilya Gradina wrote: >> On the page with packaging guidelines for Ruby [1] written about >> using unit-test. There written about using testrb2 which looks >> like deleted from fedora 22+ [2]. All started

Re: Ruby 2.3

Hi all, Here is yet another development snapshot of Ruby 2.3, this time r51643: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=10756026 Last time I mentioned bundled Molinillo in RubyGems. I moved forward with this and asked FPC for exception: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/560 Please

Orphaning rubygem-celluloid

Hi, I just orphaned rubygem-celluloid in F23 and Rawhide. It used to be dependency of rubygem-listen, but Listen recently dropped the dependency and the development of Celluloid move in a direction, where it will be virtually impossible to package it for Fedora. But if anybody has interest in this

Re: Ruby 2.3

Hi all, Here is yet another snapshot release of Ruby 2.3, this time r51741: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=10939306 This time it looks to be pretty boring update, but let me know if you note something worth of attention. BTW last time I mentioned I asked exception for bundli

Re: Ruby 2.3

Hi there, And here is another development version of Ruby: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11093674 This time, it is r51856. You can find the .spec file in dist-git in private-ruby-2.3 branch. One notable change is introduction of did_you_mean gem [1], which should give you b

Re: Ruby 2.3

Dne 16.9.2015 v 09:44 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Actually, thinking about it, it is not installed by default, so now I wonder > when/where it will crash, probably something to investigate. Found it, it is optionally loaded in gem_prelude.rb [1]. So what dependency should I use? Recomme

gem install --build-root

Hi everybody, Recently, there was submitted patch [1] for gem2rpm requesting to use "gem install --build-root" option. This made me to investigate the situation. It is actually more then one year since this option was introduced into RubyGems [2] and the intentions is quite nice for packaging. But

Re: gem install --build-root

. Vít [1] https://github.com/rdoc/rdoc/pull/341 Dne 30.9.2015 v 14:23 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Hi everybody, > > Recently, there was submitted patch [1] for gem2rpm requesting to use > "gem install --build-root" option. This made me to investigate the > situation.

Ruby 2.3

Hi all, So here is yet another development snapshot, this time r52191: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11498397 Sources are available in private-ruby-2.3 branch of Ruby dist-git as always. Notable changes from packaging point of view are: 1) Weak dependencies are used where

Re: Ruby 2.3

Hi all, Here is another test build of Ruby 2.3, this time r52392: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11640109 Let me know if you notice some issues. Vít ___ ruby-sig mailing list ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedorapr

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

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 issue

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

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 >

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

Dne 10.11.2015 v 16:09 Troy Dawson napsal(a): > > > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 8:52 AM, Vít Ondruch <mailto:vondr...@redhat.com>> wrote: > > Hi guys, > > For a long time, I thought that it would be interesting to have .gem > expansion support in

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

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.

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

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 > <mailto:vondr...@redhat.com>> wrote: >> >> Hi guys, >> >> For a

Re: Ruby 2.3 preview1

Hi, Since we are nearing to stable release of Ruby 2.3, upstream release first Ruby 2.3 preview1 snapshot. Here is the release announcement: http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-core/71450 and here you can grab the package for testing: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskin

Re: Ruby 2.3

Hi everybody, Here is yet another test release of upcoming Ruby 2.3, this time r52759: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11993896 Please test the package and let me know if you encounter any issues. Vít ___ ruby-sig mailing list ruby

Ruby 2.3 change proposal

Hi rubyists, I put together change proposal for Ruby 2.3 in Fedora 24 [1]. Any feedback is welcome. If no feedback, I'll propose this change to package wrangler in a week or so ... Vít [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Ruby_2.3 ___ ruby-sig

Re: rspec 3.4.x on rawhide

Thank you Mamoru for heads up, will take a look. Vít Dne 8.12.2015 v 13:20 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): > Hello, ruby-sig folks: > > Today, I have updated rspec series to 3.4.x on rawhide. > Please test them, thank you. > > Vít, please test rubygem-rspec-rails. Currently I disabled > test suite. It

Re: Ruby 2.3 change proposal

I've flipped the state to Category:ChangeReadyForWrangler. Vít Dne 1.12.2015 v 14:26 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Hi rubyists, > > I put together change proposal for Ruby 2.3 in Fedora 24 [1]. Any > feedback is welcome. If no feedback, I'll propose this change to package >

Re: Ruby 2.3 preview2

Hi everybody, You probably noticed that new preview release of Ruby was released [1]. Therefore I updated the .spec file in private-ruby-2.3 dist-git branch and here is the build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12195641 ARM build have not succeeded, but I am not going for ano

Re: Ruby 2.3

Hi all, Here is the latest development version of Ruby 2.3, r53264 this time: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12294564 Since the official release of Ruby 2.3 should be coming out at 25th of December, i.e. in two days, I hope this is the last test build for this development cyc

Ruby 2.3 - Mass rebuild

Hi all, You have probably noticed, that Ruby 2.3 was released during Christmas so we can move forward with the change proposal [1] and get Ruby 2.3 for F24. Actually, I already obtained build target for Ruby 2.3 [2] and build ruby-2.3 package and now its time for you to help :) What does it means

Re: Ruby 2.3 - Mass rebuild

ser $USER | tr -s ' ' | grep -vE "^Total: " | cut -d' ' >> -f2 >> >> To get the list of your packages which very likely need to be rebuild: >> >> $ ruby -e "puts (\`pkgdb-cli list --user $USER | tr -s ' ' | grep -vE &g

Re: Ruby 2.3 - Mass rebuild

Hi all, Building vim-command-t, I found out that since Ruby 2.3 packages are now using weak dependencies wherever possible, I need to tweak a BuildRequires a bit, since the weak dependencies are ignored during build. Please adjust the BR as appropriate for your package. Luckily, this is very likel

Re: Ruby 2.3 - Mass rebuild

This is the current state: $ koji list-tagged f24-ruby --latest Build Tag Built by ruby-2.3.0-52.fc24f24-ruby vondruch rubygem

Re: Ruby 2.3 - Mass rebuild

Dne 7.1.2016 v 17:33 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Dne 7.1.2016 v 17:10 Ken Dreyer napsal(a): >> This should be a part of fermig! :) > There is https://github.com/fedora-ruby/fermig/pull/5/files So this is merged now. You can use the '-u' command line parameter to rebuild jus

Re: Ruby 2.3 - Mass rebuild

Hi everybody, Dne 15.1.2016 v 14:31 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): > Hello, ruby folks: > > Vít Ondruch wrote on 01/07/2016 01:21 AM: >> Hi all, >> >> You have probably noticed, that Ruby 2.3 was released during Christmas >> so we can move forward with the change

Re: Ruby 2.3 - Mass rebuild

It seems there is plenty of issues reported by Koschei. Please check your packages if possible, you save your time later after mass rebuild. Thx Vít ___ ruby-sig mailing list ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/r

Re: Ruby 2.3 - Mass rebuild

Dne 15.1.2016 v 14:31 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): > > Current leftovers (for libruby.so.2.2) are: > > rubygem-raindrops-0:0.13.0-2.fc23.x86_64 This one is really weird. One thing I noticed that it seems that Ruby does not honor the encoding directive in RegExps (or it handles them differently than st

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >