Re: [Fedora-packaging] rubygem with extension written in C

On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 19:46 +0900, Mamoru Tasaka wrote:

Thank you for reply.

David Lutterkort wrote, at 11/04/2008 04:04 AM +9:00:

...

First off, I think this is a very good step in the right direction. A couple of questions:

  * Is the example snippet from a spec file meant only for gems with
    extension libraries or for all gems ?

• Currently only with extention libraries. If rpm created from gem file is completely noarch, gem file can be installed under %{buildroot}%{gemdir} directly. (However, of course, there is no problem if we first install gem files under %{_builddir} first even if it is noarch)

Agreed. Ultimately, it would be nice to support more of this with some stock macros; but that has nothing to do with your proposal.

...

  * Do you have a full example somewhere that follows your
    recommendations ?

• I tried to rewrite spec files in Fedora related to rubygem, which I put under http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/rubygem_specs/ The easiest example is http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/rubygem_specs/rubygem-fastthread.spec

Nice, just tried it and it does produce a -debuginfo, complete with sources :)

...

  * As for missing files in ext/, I would be happy either way; since
    the C sources for extensions are usually very small, it would be
    ok to install them as part of the rubygem- package. OTOH, I
    don't see much danger in leaving them out from the rubygem. The
    main point of building a rubygem- RPM is so that users can
    satisfy rubygem-level dependencies for other rubygems with the
    RPM-installed rubygem, i.e. if gem A is packaged as an rpm, and
    a user wants to 'gem install B' where B has a gem-level dep on
    A, that should still work. Users shouldn't expect that a 'gem
    uninstall A' would work - it would confuse RPM, anyway.

• Thanks. I added some guideline proposal about files under ext/ C codes with reflecting your commends.

The proposal looks really good - +1 from me.

David