Hello, again:
Vít Ondruch wrote, at 12/19/2011 09:43 PM +9:00:
> - Maybe ri directory should be moved to %_libdir/ri for now?
Are you referring to my TODO [2]?
Exactly.
Since this is really tricky.
I agree that, if I claim that the RI documentation is platform specific, it should go
into the %{_libdir},
on the other side this is bug IMO and I believe that it was also agreed by upstrem.
I don't think ri documents should be arch-dependent, either. The problem is that
currently they really are. Someone can say "so for now they must be moved to
%_libdir until bugs gets fixed", others can say it need not.
> - build.log just shows:
> --------------------------------------------------
> compiling main.c
> compiling dmydln.c
> compiling dmyencoding.c
> compiling version.c
> --------------------------------------------------
> or so, It is hard to check from this log if Fedora specific compilation flags are
> passed correctly or not. Please make build.log more verbose so that we can
> see what commands are actually executed during build.
You are right that build of 1.8.7 was more verbose. However I can't see any
difference in configuration or make flags. I'll try to take a look into it but I
can't promise.
> - Isn't COPY="cp -p" needed also on %install? Also
> "cp %{SOURCE1} %{buildroot}%{rubygems_dir}/rubygems/defaults"
> in %spec file should be replaced by "cp -p".
Is it required at all? It is not used even in %install of 1.8.7, but there might be
different reason.
However there is guideline [5], so it is probably good idea.
Please check if timestamps on installed files are correctly kept
(showing verbose build log will also make it easier to check this).
> - include/ruby/ contains origuruma.h, however origuruma is separately
> packaged on Fedora.
>
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=5432
> Can ruby use system-widely provided origuruma?
> If not, what prevents it?
This is though. I remember this lengthy discussion [4] about (not only) oniguruma and
from that,
This discussion seems to be about using origuruma with ruby 1.8.x.
I had the feeling that the upstream version is not compatible with
Ruby.
Moreover, I checked the latest sources from Fedora and from Ruby and they differs.
I cannot imagine to patch Ruby to support the upstream library, although we can try
to open request upstream? What do you think?
Well,
- First of all I don't know where origuruma upstream is working. If they (oniguruma
upstream) make changes on origuruma bundled in ruby tarball, they should also
update origuruma tarball and release new one.
- Bundling such external software like origuruma is almost forbidden on Fedora
(see
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470696 : why rubygem-passenger
cannot be in Fedora currently) and we should advise ruby upstream to use external
oniguruma (or to add support to use external oniguruma).
Regards,
Mamoru