From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Woodcroft Subject: Re: Ruby 2.4.0 update Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2017 21:16:22 +1000 Message-ID: <905edccd-9aba-65ce-f75c-16f6777f2fe4@uq.edu.au> References: <878tr4ndeq.fsf@kirby.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <7d94e235-d02c-38f2-7c72-358b2fd123be@uq.edu.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40602) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cP62H-0007Gh-L5 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Jan 2017 06:16:47 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cP62C-0002dO-N5 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Jan 2017 06:16:45 -0500 Received: from mailhub2.soe.uq.edu.au ([130.102.132.209]:44651 helo=newmailhub.uq.edu.au) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cP62C-0002aG-3t for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Jan 2017 06:16:40 -0500 In-Reply-To: <7d94e235-d02c-38f2-7c72-358b2fd123be@uq.edu.au> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Marius Bakke , guix-devel@gnu.org Hi Marius, On 26/12/16 23:18, Ben Woodcroft wrote: > On 26/12/16 03:09, Marius Bakke wrote: >> In good tradition, ruby made a new release today (25/12)[0]. >> >> I tried building some packages with the new version, but ruby-minitest >> complains that Rake 12 is too new (even with the latest minitest). There >> have been some core changes as well, with Fixnum and Bignum now merged >> into a single Integer class. > I updated ruby-minitest to the newest version and pushed, but as you > mention the check phase requires rake <12. This actually stems from > hoe though rather than minitest, I've asked the devs about it here: > https://github.com/seattlerb/hoe/issues/77 This issue has now been fixed in hoe, in the just released 3.16.0. I just pushed this to master after building the downstream packages without issue as '8e941f20',. > I'm not sure that the Fixnum/Bignum changes are particularly harmful > if I'm understanding correctly, since both classes can still be used. > I can't see any possible backwards incompatibility. Well, I suppose it isn't impossible. Shouldn't say such things. >> I suggest that we keep ruby 2.3 as the main "ruby" variable until the >> ecosystem catches up. Users will still get the latest version when >> using `guix package` or `guix environment`. WDYT? > I would agree, but I'd hope that the hoe issue is an isolated one and > that we can make ruby-2.4 the default very soon. What do you think about making 2.4 the default and pushing to staging, if there are no obvious issues? Thanks and happy travels, ben