On 2012-01-04 13:57, Darryl L. Pierce wrote:
On Tue, Jan 03, 2012 at 09:40:52AM -0800, Michael Stahnke wrote:
> I really dislike bundler. However, from the Ruby ecosystem point of
> view,
> it's there and it's not going anywhere. It featured on every
> rubygem page.
> It certainly conflicts with the bundled library viewpoint Fedora
> has, but
> without it, many many applications built upon Ruby won't make it
> into
> Fedora. This is especially true since rpm by design cannot have
> multiple
> versions of the same package installed; whereas gem can.
Sure it can. Look at kernel as an example. It depends on how the
package
is installed as to whether the rpm will upgrade an existing package
or
install in parallel (and also other factors such as locations of
files,
etc.).
Actually it's an explicit instruction from YUM to RPM, where YUM uses
the 'installonly_pkgs' configuration directive so that it knows to issue
this slightly different RPM command to RPM for a certain list of package
names.
This is exactly why this mechanism can't (should not) be used for
Ruby*; the list of packages that would need to be included in this list
of packages to only install (not update, not upgrade) would be enormous,
and subject to change quite frequently.
Kind regards,
Jeroen van Meeuwen
--
Systems Architect, Kolab Systems AG
e: vanmeeuwen at
kolabsys.com
t: +44 144 340 9500
m: +44 74 2516 3817
w:
http://www.kolabsys.com
pgp: 9342 BF08