From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pjotr Prins Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Add ruby-rspec, bundler, and ruby-useragent Date: Sun, 31 May 2015 00:23:42 +0200 Message-ID: <20150530222342.GA16386@thebird.nl> References: <87382hsayu.fsf@izanagi.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <87zj4n9joh.fsf@gnu.org> <20150530210201.GA15305@thebird.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56781) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YypAj-0003DG-U2 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 May 2015 18:24:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YypAe-0003WW-Ut for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 May 2015 18:24:05 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: "Thompson, David" Cc: guix-devel On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 05:57:23PM -0400, Thompson, David wrote: > > that essentially replaces the old rvm or rbenv! So much better :) > > Oh, wow! Maybe you can help me because I tried to use Guix to replace > rvm/rbenv at work and I failed miserably. Native extensions failed to > build successfully or would fail to dlopen shared libraries later on. > The ffi gem was particularly problematic. I had no choice but to > switch to rbenv to keep moving with my tasks. Have you experienced > similar problems? Yes. Currently cucumber install fails with the Guix bundler. We should try and resolve them one by one. The main problem is the mixing of local and guix environments. Mixing the two environments creates confusion :). It would be nice if bundler could run in a 'clean Guix room'. > > BTW: would it be an idea to name the bundler package ruby-bundler instead? > > The reason I didn't name it as such was because it's primary focus is > being an executable program that users interact with, not a library. I like the idea of listing all Ruby packages so it is clear what is there: guix package -A ruby Do you have another way? Pj.