From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rob Syme Subject: Re: Package ruby-ansi appears to be broken Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 13:11:56 +0000 Message-ID: References: <5720AFD4.6070305@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c11bf860c7b970531772844 Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43216) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1avPGC-0003es-8P for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Apr 2016 09:12:12 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1avPGB-0007D0-1F for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Apr 2016 09:12:08 -0400 Received: from mail-io0-x235.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4001:c06::235]:36278) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1avPGA-0007Cs-Qc for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Apr 2016 09:12:06 -0400 Received: by mail-io0-x235.google.com with SMTP id u185so52763958iod.3 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2016 06:12:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5720AFD4.6070305@gmail.com> 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: Ben Woodcroft , "guix-devel@gnu.org" --94eb2c11bf860c7b970531772844 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Ah, good thinking Ben, thanks. I've had a quick look, and the rubygems included in ruby version 2.3.1 tarball includes all of the symlinks fixes made in PR#1209, so *maybe* we don't need rubygems version 2.5.2 after all. I'm just testing to see if upgrading the ruby package to 2.3.1 fixes everything. -r P.S. I certainly didn't mean to insinuate that this was the fault of Ricardo (or you, for that matter). Thanks to all contributors! On Wed, 27 Apr 2016 at 20:26 Ben Woodcroft wrote: > Hi Rob, > > On 27/04/16 20:39, Rob Syme wrote: > > Hi all > > > > Running `guix environment --ad-hoc ruby-ansi` fails for me (and > > others). The package definition uses the ruby-build-system but fetches > > the tar.gz directly from github instead of from rubygems. I'll try and > > find time to have a closer look, but if Ricardo has any time, he might > > be able to debug it faster than me. > > I think this the error is very similar to that described here, and > occurs during 'gem install' > https://github.com/rubygems/rubygems/issues/1448 > > which is fixed in rubygems 2.5.2, but unfortunately ruby comes with > 2.5.1. Today a new version of ruby was released, but sadly, still 2.5.1. > So, I think this means we will need to either incorporate the patch(es) > that fix this into the ruby package, or package rubygems alongside ruby > somehow. Or, since there is only a problem during build time, perhaps > clobber the gem from the ruby package with a rubygems package during > build time. Unless you have any better ideas? > > Thanks for reporting this. I'm not sure we can blame Ricardo for this. > Rather, it is all my fault. > ben > --94eb2c11bf860c7b970531772844 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Ah, good thinking Ben, thanks. I've had a quick look, = and the rubygems included in ruby version 2.3.1 tarball includes all of the= symlinks fixes made in PR#1209, so *maybe* we don't need rubygems vers= ion 2.5.2 after all. I'm just testing to see if upgrading the ruby pack= age to 2.3.1 fixes everything.

-r

P.S. = I certainly didn't mean to insinuate that this was the fault of Ricardo= (or you, for that matter). Thanks to all contributors!

<= div>
On Wed, 27 Apr 2016 at = 20:26 Ben Woodcroft <woodibe@gmail.com> wrote:
https://github.com/rubygems/rubygems/issues/1448=

which is fixed in rubygems 2.5.2, but unfortunately ruby comes with
2.5.1. Today a new version of ruby was released, but sadly, still 2.5.1. So, I think this means we will need to either incorporate the patch(es)
that fix this into the ruby package, or package rubygems alongside ruby
somehow. Or, since there is only a problem during build time, perhaps
clobber the gem from the ruby package with a rubygems package during
build time. Unless you have any better ideas?

Thanks for reporting this. I'm not sure we can blame Ricardo for this.<= br> Rather, it is all my fault.
ben
--94eb2c11bf860c7b970531772844--