ruby-sig May 2012

ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org

8 participants
5 discussions

Ruby 2.0
by Vít Ondruch 05 Dec '12

05 Dec '12

Hi, Just for your information, I have pushed ruby-2.0 branch into the Ruby's git repo. So if you like test the latest Ruby, you need to get the latest HEAD tarball, which could be prepared using: $ cd /path/to/your/ruby/sources $ ./tool/make-snapshot tmp Note that you have to have available subversion and bison on your system. Also note that the content of tarball is needed to be repacked, that the Ruby sources will be stored in "ruby-2.0.0-p0" folder (I know, it is annoyance, but you can fix the spec and send me a patch ;). Also note that I currently keep the ruby_abi at 1.9.1, while the official release will have 2.0.0 probably. This should allow you to use Fedora's gems without rebuild. Any comments/patches are appreciated. Vit [1] http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=ruby.git;a=tree;h=refs/heads/ruby-2…

1 3

ABRT for Ruby
by Vít Ondruch 13 Jul '12

13 Jul '12

Hello, I've put together some basic implementation of ABRT support for Ruby. It means that whenever your application/library fails in Ruby code (note that this does not catch segfaults), it will be easy to your users to report such problem into Bugzilla. Source code: https://github.com/voxik/abrt-ruby Gem: gem install abrt ATM, there are several ways how to test the gem: 1) "require 'abrt'" in your code, as soon as possible, but later then rubygems if you are using Ruby 1.8. 2) If you are already using Ruby 1.9, you can add "RUBYOPT='-rabrt'" into your environment. This assures that every time Ruby is started, the abrt gem is activated. Unfortunately, this doesn't work with Ruby 1.8, since RubyGems are not loaded by default and "RUBYOPT='-rubygems -rabrt'" does not work for some reason :/ Please note that ABRT reports errors just for Ruby libraries managed by RPM. If something appears to not work as expected, it is good to observe /var/log/messages for more details. In the future, I'd love to see this integrated into Ruby (probably in F18?). I already asked upstream about possible integration [1], but if went without response, so it seems that I will have to come with some proposal. I'd love to here your comments and of course your patches :) Thank you Vit [1] http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-core/42236

3 17

Gemfile.lock questions
by Ken Dreyer 04 Jun '12

04 Jun '12

I have two more Ruby newbie questions :) I see a lot of Gems contain a "Gemfile.lock" file. From looking at the conventions in Fedora's packages, it's a good idea to not include the Gemfile.lock in RPMs. I'm trying to understand how Gemfile.lock relates to packaging. General question: Is Gemfile.lock only intended to be a convenience for Ruby Gem developers? I thought Gemfile.lock was only for development, but it seems like its contents can also affect an application's runtime...? Packaging question: In preparation for packaging up Gitorious, I've found that I need to delete some entries from Gemfile.lock in order to use alternate Gem versions. Is it always safe to override the version numbers in Gemfile.lock like this? - Ken

8 14

Anyone working on Rails 3.2.3 rpms?
by Emanuel Rietveld 16 May '12

16 May '12

Hi, I'm getting ready to start working on Rails 3.2.3 for F18 (maybe) and EPEL 6 (for sure). Just wondering if anybody has already tried to package it and found any gotchas you could make me aware of. Maybe we can share work. Emanuel

4 6

rubygem-ruby-debug19 suite ready for review
by Mamoru TASAKA 03 May '12

03 May '12

Hello, all: One of the nasty issues related to broken dependency on old ruby is on ruby-debug related packages. For ruby 1.9 ruby-debug related gems are renamed and need new review requests and approval. Now I have finished packaging and done some basic tests on these gems and these are ready for review. The related bug requests are: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=818454 rubygem-linecache19 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=818457 rubygem-ruby-debug-base19 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=818458 rubygem-ruby-debug19 bug 818457 depends on bug 818454 and bug 818458 depends on 818457. With approval of these 3 requests, broken deps report will be less noisy. I would appreciate if someone will review these requests. Also I can take and review swap reviews. Regards, Mamoru

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

ruby-sig May 2012