From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vicente Eduardo Subject: bug#38500: Ruby is built against libruby-static.a Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2019 14:25:51 +0100 Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f910250598f4de01" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:37491) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ict13-0005gU-MU for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 10:26:06 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ict12-0003T6-DC for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 10:26:05 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:39065) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ict10-0003SM-SC for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 10:26:03 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ict10-0001NG-OM for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 10:26:02 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:47670) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1icrE0-0002Mt-M1 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 08:31:21 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1icrDz-0004jX-HT for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 08:31:20 -0500 Received: from mail-il1-x12d.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::12d]:39659) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1icrDz-0004fg-AZ for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 08:31:19 -0500 Received: by mail-il1-x12d.google.com with SMTP id a7so2976499ild.6 for ; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 05:31:18 -0800 (PST) List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: 38500@debbugs.gnu.org --000000000000f910250598f4de01 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" I'm trying to use Ruby interpeter as a library to link it against my project (metacall: https://github.com/metacall/distributable/blob/65493b393388f5d66d9b466e5d49f9128fee27ea/source/metacall.scm#L117 ). So I tried to download the Ruby package and libruby.so seems not to be present. Running ldd against ruby executable shows that it is linked with libruby-static.a. When I do ldd against Ruby on my Debian system, it is linked dynamically to libruby.so. I would like to have two versions, or at least the dynamic one, that's the common way Ruby should be built, and also the Guixy style. If this isn't handled, I will have to inherit the package and modify the compilation flags in order to compile Ruby with the dynamic library version. Thanks. --000000000000f910250598f4de01 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'm trying to use Ruby interpeter as a library to lin= k it against my project (metacall: https://github.com/metacall/distributable/blob/65493b393388f5d66d= 9b466e5d49f9128fee27ea/source/metacall.scm#L117 ). So I tried to downlo= ad the Ruby package and libruby.so seems not to be present.

Running ldd against ruby executable shows tha= t it is linked with libruby-static.a. When I do ldd against Ruby on my Debi= an system, it is linked dynamically to libruby.so.

I would like to have two versions, or at least the dyn= amic one, that's the common way Ruby should be built, and also the Guix= y style.

If this isn'= ;t handled, I will have to inherit the package and modify the compilation f= lags in order to compile Ruby with the dynamic library version.

Thanks.
--000000000000f910250598f4de01-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Brett Gilio Subject: bug#38500: Ruby is built against libruby-static.a Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2019 10:44:38 -0600 Message-ID: <87fthwdr0p.fsf@posteo.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41939) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1idnA4-0005I0-Ab for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 07 Dec 2019 22:23:09 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1idnA0-00051L-HX for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 07 Dec 2019 22:23:07 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:44224) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1idn9z-000502-F2 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 07 Dec 2019 22:23:04 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1idn9z-0004iG-BW for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 07 Dec 2019 22:23:03 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: (Vicente Eduardo's message of "Thu, 5 Dec 2019 14:25:51 +0100") List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Vicente Eduardo Cc: 38500@debbugs.gnu.org Vicente Eduardo writes: > I would like to have two versions, or at least the dynamic one, that's the common way > Ruby should be built, and also the Guixy style. This actually brings up a rather interesting point. What is the Guix protocol on compilation for dynamic vs statically linked interpreters? This is a prevalent issue not just for Ruby, but for also how we handle GHC, Rust, JDK, and so on. Generally, I think we dynamically link most objects. _BUT_, I could be missing part of the story here. So I am going to wait for the higher powers that be to respond. In the mean time, when I get a moment, I will do some auditing on this package to see if the issue is just that we are missing some compilation procedure. Hopefully it is just as simple as that, but I still think the issue of linkage style (dynamic vs static linkage) remains prevalent. Hopefully we hear some noise on this soon. -- Brett M. Gilio https://git.sr.ht/~brettgilio/ From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vicente Eduardo Subject: bug#38500: Ruby is built against libruby-static.a Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2019 15:44:09 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87fthwdr0p.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007e396b05993250bc" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42667) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1idxo0-0002Em-FS for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2019 09:45:05 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1idxny-0004Uo-B8 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2019 09:45:04 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:44701) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1idxny-0004TF-4A for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2019 09:45:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1idxny-0006AF-0A for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2019 09:45:02 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <87fthwdr0p.fsf@posteo.net> List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Brett Gilio Cc: 38500@debbugs.gnu.org --0000000000007e396b05993250bc Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Python and Ruby link dynamically by default from the executable of the runtime to the runtime library. Most runtimes do that, it is a good design that allows reusing the runtime to the embedders. As exception of NodeJS which avoids this because of a design decision related to the distribution, and because it hasn't got an embedding API and an stable extension API (N-API) until 8.x, and Rust, due to lack of ABI stability. I didn't check GHC and Java yet, but most languages that have extension and mainly embedding API do that (JVM has embedding and extension API). I am not an expert about Guile but I can check the configure/Makefile of Ruby in order to see what flags do it need to compile against the dynamic library, and providing the static too as Debian distribution does for Ruby (or Guix itself for Python and libpython3.7m.so). El s=C3=A1b., 7 dic. 2019 17:44, Brett Gilio escribi=C3= =B3: > Vicente Eduardo writes: > > > I would like to have two versions, or at least the dynamic one, that's > the common way > > Ruby should be built, and also the Guixy style. > > This actually brings up a rather interesting point. What is the Guix > protocol on compilation for dynamic vs statically linked interpreters? > This is a prevalent issue not just for Ruby, but for also how we handle > GHC, Rust, JDK, and so on. > > Generally, I think we dynamically link most objects. _BUT_, I could be > missing part of the story here. So I am going to wait for the higher > powers that be to respond. > > In the mean time, when I get a moment, I will do some auditing on this > package to see if the issue is just that we are missing some compilation > procedure. Hopefully it is just as simple as that, but I still think the > issue of linkage style (dynamic vs static linkage) remains prevalent. > > Hopefully we hear some noise on this soon. > > -- > Brett M. Gilio > https://git.sr.ht/~brettgilio/ > --0000000000007e396b05993250bc Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Python and Ruby link dynamically by default from the exec= utable of the runtime to the runtime library. Most runtimes do that, it is = a good design that allows reusing the runtime to the embedders. As exceptio= n of NodeJS which avoids this because of a design decision related to the d= istribution, and because it hasn't got an embedding API and an stable e= xtension API (N-API) until 8.x, and Rust, due to lack of ABI stability.
I didn't check GHC and Java y= et, but most languages that have extension and mainly embedding API do that= (JVM has embedding and extension API).

I am not an expert about Guile but I can=C2=A0 check the co= nfigure/Makefile of Ruby in order to see what flags do it need to compile a= gainst the dynamic library, and providing the static too as Debian distribu= tion does for Ruby (or Guix itself for Python and libpython3.7m.so).

El s=C3=A1b., 7 dic. 2019 17:44, Bre= tt Gilio <brettg@posteo.net>= escribi=C3=B3:
Vicente Eduardo <= ;v= ic798@gmail.com> writes:

> I would like to have two versions, or at least the dynamic one, that&#= 39;s the common way
> Ruby should be built, and also the Guixy style.

This actually brings up a rather interesting point. What is the Guix
protocol on compilation for dynamic vs statically linked interpreters?
This is a prevalent issue not just for Ruby, but for also how we handle
GHC, Rust, JDK, and so on.

Generally, I think we dynamically link most objects. _BUT_, I could be
missing part of the story here. So I am going to wait for the higher
powers that be to respond.

In the mean time, when I get a moment, I will do some auditing on this
package to see if the issue is just that we are missing some compilation procedure. Hopefully it is just as simple as that, but I still think the issue of linkage style (dynamic vs static linkage) remains prevalent.

Hopefully we hear some noise on this soon.

--
Brett M. Gilio
https://git.sr.ht/~brettgilio/
--0000000000007e396b05993250bc-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vicente Eduardo Subject: bug#38500: Ruby is built against libruby-static.a Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2019 15:49:56 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87fthwdr0p.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002a5591059932656c" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:55250) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1idxtn-0004BQ-Oc for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2019 09:51:05 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1idxtm-0008Pi-4C for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2019 09:51:03 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:44705) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1idxtl-0008OK-TG for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2019 09:51:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1idxtl-0006J1-R1 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2019 09:51:01 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Brett Gilio Cc: 38500@debbugs.gnu.org --0000000000002a5591059932656c Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I have checked the flags needed for compiling dynamically. It should be very easy to solve, just by adding this flag to the configure: --enable-shared This should be enough to compile Ruby runtime dynamic library and to compile Ruby interpeter executable against this lib. Reference: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/0d63a2104777e467568a31037a6573e1879870c7/= configure.ac#L3136 El dom., 8 dic. 2019 15:44, Vicente Eduardo escribi=C3= =B3: > Python and Ruby link dynamically by default from the executable of the > runtime to the runtime library. Most runtimes do that, it is a good desig= n > that allows reusing the runtime to the embedders. As exception of NodeJS > which avoids this because of a design decision related to the distributio= n, > and because it hasn't got an embedding API and an stable extension API > (N-API) until 8.x, and Rust, due to lack of ABI stability. > > I didn't check GHC and Java yet, but most languages that have extension > and mainly embedding API do that (JVM has embedding and extension API). > > I am not an expert about Guile but I can check the configure/Makefile of > Ruby in order to see what flags do it need to compile against the dynamic > library, and providing the static too as Debian distribution does for Rub= y > (or Guix itself for Python and libpython3.7m.so). > > El s=C3=A1b., 7 dic. 2019 17:44, Brett Gilio escribi= =C3=B3: > >> Vicente Eduardo writes: >> >> > I would like to have two versions, or at least the dynamic one, that's >> the common way >> > Ruby should be built, and also the Guixy style. >> >> This actually brings up a rather interesting point. What is the Guix >> protocol on compilation for dynamic vs statically linked interpreters? >> This is a prevalent issue not just for Ruby, but for also how we handle >> GHC, Rust, JDK, and so on. >> >> Generally, I think we dynamically link most objects. _BUT_, I could be >> missing part of the story here. So I am going to wait for the higher >> powers that be to respond. >> >> In the mean time, when I get a moment, I will do some auditing on this >> package to see if the issue is just that we are missing some compilation >> procedure. Hopefully it is just as simple as that, but I still think the >> issue of linkage style (dynamic vs static linkage) remains prevalent. >> >> Hopefully we hear some noise on this soon. >> >> -- >> Brett M. Gilio >> https://git.sr.ht/~brettgilio/ >> > --0000000000002a5591059932656c Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I have checked the flags needed for compiling dynamically= .

It should be very easy to so= lve, just by adding this flag to the configure:

=
--enable-shared

This should be enough to compile Ruby runtime dynamic libra= ry and to compile Ruby interpeter executable against this lib.


El dom.,= 8 dic. 2019 15:44, Vicente Eduardo <vic798@gmail.com> escribi=C3=B3:
Python and Ruby link dynamically by default from th= e executable of the runtime to the runtime library. Most runtimes do that, = it is a good design that allows reusing the runtime to the embedders. As ex= ception of NodeJS which avoids this because of a design decision related to= the distribution, and because it hasn't got an embedding API and an st= able extension API (N-API) until 8.x, and Rust, due to lack of ABI stabilit= y.

I didn't check GHC and = Java yet, but most languages that have extension and mainly embedding API d= o that (JVM has embedding and extension API).

I am not an expert about Guile but I can=C2=A0 check = the configure/Makefile of Ruby in order to see what flags do it need to com= pile against the dynamic library, and providing the static too as Debian di= stribution does for Ruby (or Guix itself for Python and libpython3.7m.so)= .

El s=C3=A1b., 7 dic. 2019 17:44, Brett Gilio <brettg@posteo.net> escribi=C3=B3:
Vicente Eduard= o <vic798@gmail.com> writes:

> I would like to have two versions, or at least the dynamic one, that&#= 39;s the common way
> Ruby should be built, and also the Guixy style.

This actually brings up a rather interesting point. What is the Guix
protocol on compilation for dynamic vs statically linked interpreters?
This is a prevalent issue not just for Ruby, but for also how we handle
GHC, Rust, JDK, and so on.

Generally, I think we dynamically link most objects. _BUT_, I could be
missing part of the story here. So I am going to wait for the higher
powers that be to respond.

In the mean time, when I get a moment, I will do some auditing on this
package to see if the issue is just that we are missing some compilation procedure. Hopefully it is just as simple as that, but I still think the issue of linkage style (dynamic vs static linkage) remains prevalent.

Hopefully we hear some noise on this soon.

--
Brett M. Gilio
https://git.sr.ht/~brettgilio/
--0000000000002a5591059932656c-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Bug reports for GNU Guix Subject: bug#38500: Ruby is built against libruby-static.a Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2019 16:42:15 +0100 Message-ID: <87a782bz90.fsf@nckx> References: <87fthwdr0p.fsf@posteo.net> Reply-To: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34173) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1idyi9-0003pO-Fg for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2019 10:43:06 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1idyi8-0002s2-Fy for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2019 10:43:05 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:46111) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1idyi7-0002m3-C8 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2019 10:43:04 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1idyi7-0007y1-Az for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2019 10:43:03 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-reply-to: <87fthwdr0p.fsf@posteo.net> List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" Cc: 38500@debbugs.gnu.org, Brett Gilio , Vicente Eduardo --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Vincente, Brett, Brett Gilio =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A > Vicente Eduardo writes: > >> I would like to have two versions, or at least the dynamic one,=20 >> that's the common way >> Ruby should be built, and also the Guixy style. Important: static linking isn't the Guixy style at all! Statically linking different packages =E2=80=98subverts=E2=80=99 Guix, can = subvert=20 grafting and lead to undetected security holes. > Generally, I think we dynamically link most objects. Correct. > _BUT_, I could be > missing part of the story here. So I am going to wait for the=20 > higher > powers that be to respond. You could ask Pjotr Prins and David Thompson but I suspect that it=20 was simply an oversight: most packages link dynamically by default=20 because it's the sane thing to do, and it would have been=20 reasonable to assume Ruby did too. If there is a good reason to link statically, it should be added=20 in a comment. Kind regards, T G-R --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEfo+u0AlEeO9y5k0W2Imw8BjFSTwFAl3tGdcACgkQ2Imw8BjF STxP7g//Q2Q6IS6BCmEmdunGRZIbDquuU+btDA44/p+vhbBocOyDnI8cPwsVBsqt 1I70TsklZU1Wt7qhPn+RbGaLIMnVDc1phUgqO9pGY8pI6KeaFoUneYQjq6fgn2W0 S0COWrg2nCZCf7ReoJ6uhhcV+ma+23wOrJL1LgaCoSG+LtRyzn73dHsqVx/HQaKA IZIX32QGhDF6siwcdytWtcWkeCC98wS2oZlCsn0hnQkwV+PY5eBig/MYqAvgUvaL Nc7tEFdbGLUj7rfLrjFYTF7tJhbyC1MzPrnQ6+is1i5hrtdND2GW1R4KhmTsCuKV c9WKvqPwxeotVg3BDGoOpNLOa+ZdgE535A9I8iZSqBllTek5ZYPcqdlp5bO8gUiq n0d2pY+7mv8r46D01genvbCf4AFzj9/OYnQJK+5FTbidYClaG4iYQZlHvbc4zzlz cap54+yP1ATlYkd5UvBcH4nd5KwVsDoA9NXspSmraFoccctc0cG4JHf7IfDH/IRu pjqVaCIdnaJR42Jupwld9+0H2qCr0X1tvb0Av5WlRHWHCfg9NGDf631izEsEcIue 769dNd4+vK5Tll1mQyCoO6UkBopTFP9ug7jFygSkFZWgAjjzPwRRbGs/uTDq4bTW 21DF3SLrmeIBnJBUJrknT5k+CyddW7nO7tOrZbWpEUBYHfLqrig= =QDEB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Brett Gilio Subject: bug#38500: Ruby is built against libruby-static.a Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2019 12:33:04 -0600 Message-ID: <87fthtuz6n.fsf@posteo.net> References: <87fthwdr0p.fsf@posteo.net> <87a782bz90.fsf@nckx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41109) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ieNrA-0005bC-Bp for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Dec 2019 13:34:07 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ieNr9-0001ym-0i for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Dec 2019 13:34:04 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:48442) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ieNr8-0001xQ-It for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Dec 2019 13:34:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ieNr8-0005Jd-GV for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Dec 2019 13:34:02 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <87a782bz90.fsf@nckx> (Tobias Geerinckx-Rice's message of "Sun, 08 Dec 2019 16:42:15 +0100") List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice Cc: 38500@debbugs.gnu.org, Vicente Eduardo Tobias Geerinckx-Rice writes: > You could ask Pjotr Prins and David Thompson but I suspect that it was > simply an oversight: most packages link dynamically by default because > it's the sane thing to do, and it would have been reasonable to assume > Ruby did too. Tobias, I did some investigating about enabling the --enable-shared flag for dynamic linkage of the Ruby package. Superficially it seems that simply --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- #:configure-flags (list "--enable-shared") --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- takes care of the issue. However, this will trigger a rebuild more along the lines of core-updates. --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- Building the following 1261 packages would ensure 3512 dependent packages are rebuilt: --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- It is basically everything from SBCL, R, GNOME, XFCE, several Python packages, and more which is expected. So I guess the question is where does this patch go given that it isn't an update but would still spark a massive rebuild? &&& Vicente, I have a suspicion that this patch will need to rest on core-updates (or staging) for a number of weeks before it reaches master. In the meantime, I suggest you just inherit the ruby package in your own channel with the package arguments modified to reflect the `#:configure-flags` snippet I have listed above. Okay. Carry on. -- Brett M. Gilio https://git.sr.ht/~brettgilio/ From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Brett Gilio Subject: bug#38500: Ruby is built against libruby-static.a Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2019 14:57:48 -0600 Message-ID: <87tv69tdwz.fsf@posteo.net> References: <87fthwdr0p.fsf@posteo.net> <87a782bz90.fsf@nckx> <87fthtuz6n.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40427) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ieQ6U-0003mt-US for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Dec 2019 15:58:03 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ieQ6T-0006v7-V5 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Dec 2019 15:58:02 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:48518) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ieQ6T-0006v0-Rd for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Dec 2019 15:58:01 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ieQ6T-0003UJ-RJ for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Dec 2019 15:58:01 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <87fthtuz6n.fsf@posteo.net> (Brett Gilio's message of "Mon, 09 Dec 2019 12:33:04 -0600") List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice Cc: 38500@debbugs.gnu.org, Vicente Eduardo I have submitted a patch that will go into core-updates, with bug report #38552. That patch will close both of these bug reports. Thanks. -- Brett M. Gilio https://git.sr.ht/~brettgilio/ From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Brett Gilio Subject: bug#38500: Ruby is built against libruby-static.a Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 21:51:12 -0600 Message-ID: <87k170289b.fsf@posteo.net> References: <87fthwdr0p.fsf@posteo.net> <87a782bz90.fsf@nckx> <87fthtuz6n.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41740) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ifbzp-0005FT-NW for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 22:52:06 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ifbzo-00084Z-My for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 22:52:05 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:55157) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ifbzo-00084L-Jm for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 22:52:04 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ifbzm-00042U-Iq for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Dec 2019 22:52:02 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-To: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <87fthtuz6n.fsf@posteo.net> (Brett Gilio's message of "Mon, 09 Dec 2019 12:33:04 -0600") List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice Cc: 38500-done@debbugs.gnu.org, Vicente Eduardo Pushed to core-updates with fd248cb815d571043c3a0c52a01c9b3e368a069e. Closing -- Brett M. Gilio Homepage -- https://scm.pw/ GNU Guix -- https://guix.gnu.org/