ruby-sig February 2017

ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org

3 participants
6 discussions

Ruby 2.2
by Vít Ondruch 22 Sep '23

22 Sep '23

Hi everybody, Since Ruby 2.2 is going to be released during Christmas and -preview1 release is imminent (this Wednesday?), it is probably time to start looking into its packaging. So here is the updated .spec file [1] and scratch build [2], which can be finally build on all platforms. Sorry, no Copr for you, since Ruby's build fails there due to old RHEL kernel :/. What has changed from packaging point of view? Luckily, not much, but here are a few bullets which comes to my mind: * RPM 4.12 introduces new %load function, which is used to load RPM macros during RPM build. This allowed to drop my custom RPM macro [3]. On the other hand, you'll be able to build the Ruby only on F21+ (luckily, you should be able to build SRPM everywhere). * The RubyGems filesystem was not explicit enough, so there might be something accidentally packages. This is now more explicit, so we should be safer. * Ruby now ships with MiniTest and Test::Unit. The very good news is that they are installed so far as a regular gems. This means that you have to always specify them in your Gemfile, if you are using Bundler, but this is generally step in good direction. I hope that upstream will not change their mind :) Due to this change, we have new subpackages rubygem-test-unit (and rubygem-power_assert, which is now Test::Unit's dependency). No more %{_bindir}/testrb (but nobody is using it these days anyway, right? ;) * Some prevailing test failures were resolved, some others introduced, but hopefully they'll get resolved prior stable release. Generally, I'd say that not much has changed since 2.1, which is good news. Please test the packaging if you can and let me know about any issues you encountered. Also, if you have any other suggestions about Ruby packaging in general, what we could improve etc, this is probably good time to share. It seems that OpenSUSE guys are improving their packaging, so you might want to get some inspiration there [4, 5, 6] ;) Vít [1] http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/ruby.git/log/?h=private-ruby-2.2 [2] http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7578843 [3] http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/ruby.git/commit/?h=private-ruby-2.2&id=8… [4] https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:darix:ruby/ruby-common [5] https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:darix:ruby/ruby2.2 [6] https://github.com/openSUSE/gem2rpm/commits/master

4 19

ruby-sig FAS group and rubygems build in Copr
by Vít Ondruch 20 Apr '17

20 Apr '17

Hi everybody, You probably noticed, that there is ongoing build of all Python packages in Copr [1] and today, I was approached by Miroslav Suchý, that he'd like to do the same for rubygems. And this in turn triggered these questions: 1) Would you be interested to create ruby-sig group in FAS? We could make the group owner of some packages and in turn, the members of the group could maintain the packages, without explicitly asking for some ACLs. 2) For the Copr rebuild of rubygems, there needs to be some FAS group again. Python guys are asking for "pypi-builds-sig" group [2], hence following their lead, I'd like to ask for "rubygems-builds-sig" group (note that although I don't like the '-sig' suffix in this case, it is mandated by the infrastructure ticket template). So what are your thoughts? Vít [1] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org… [2] https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/5311

5 11

Major update of hashie? (2.0.5 -> 3.5.5)
by František Dvořák 28 Feb '17

28 Feb '17

Hi, any objection against updating of hashie from 2.0.5 to 3.5.5? I would update it on rawhide after upcoming Fedora branching (for F27+). There is no strict reason for it, I just have a software (occi-core), which claims specific requirement 'hashie >= 3.3.1', but it works fine with the current version 2.0.5. Dependencies of hashie are: rOCCI-server-0:1.1.9-2.fc26.src rubygem-chef-zero-0:2.2-4.fc26.src rubygem-occi-core-0:4.3.5-2.fc26.src rubygem-omniauth-0:1.3.1-2.fc26.src Only problematic seems to be chef-zero requiring 'hashie < 3'. The newer version on rubygems requires only 'hashie < 4.0 >= 2.0', so maybe it is only about relaxing it in the package. Frantisek

1 0

gcc BR
by Vít Ondruch 22 Feb '17

22 Feb '17

Hi, No I feel ashamed that although I was lobbying for gcc BR, I never used it in my packages. So thank you František for doing so (I assume that you were forced to do so due to gcc missing in buildroot, right?). Now I just wonder, wouldn't it be better to add these requires into ruby-devel? Although one can BR: ruby-devel just because of the macros, so this would be unnecessary. So my other idea is to modify gem2rpm to add the requires whenever the gem has binary extension. There might be false positives as well, but one should review the otput of gem2rpm, so it is possible to remove the BR in case it is not required. Any comments? Vít -------- Přeposlaná zpráva -------- Předmět: Fedora rawhide compose report: 20170221.n.1 changes Datum: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 08:47:10 +0000 Od: Fedora Rawhide Report <rawhide(a)fedoraproject.org> Přeposláno - Komu: Development discussions related to Fedora <devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org> Komu: devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Package: rubygem-ox-2.4.9-1.fc26 Old package: rubygem-ox-2.4.7-3.fc26 Summary: Fast XML parser and object serializer RPMs: rubygem-ox rubygem-ox-doc Size: 801282 bytes Size change: 2056 bytes Changelog: * Tue Feb 21 2017 FrantiÅ¡ek DvoÅÃ¡k <valtri(a)civ.zcu.cz> - 2.4.9-1 - Update to 2.4.9 (#1413428) - Add gcc BR as required by C and C++ guidelines

3 3

[HEADS UP] - rubygem-webmock updated in Rawhide
by Vít Ondruch 08 Feb '17

08 Feb '17

Hi all, Since webmock was FTBFS for a while and update to Ruby 2.4 didn't make it any better, I decided to bump the webmock from old 1.21.0 release to version 2.3.2 and honestly, I am not 100% sure what it might break. It seems that the changes were not that intrusive, but nonetheless some changes might be required according to the CHANGELOG [1]. This is the list of possibly affected packages: rubygem-aws-sdk-core-0:2.3.20-1.fc25.src rubygem-aws-sdk-resources-0:2.3.20-1.fc25.src rubygem-coveralls-0:0.8.13-2.fc26.src rubygem-fog-brightbox-0:0.11.0-1.fc26.src rubygem-heroku-0:3.41.3-2.fc24.src rubygem-hipchat-0:1.4.0-2.fc23.src rubygem-oauth-0:0.4.7-9.fc24.src rubygem-occi-api-0:4.3.7-1.fc26.src rubygem-pkgwat-0:0.1.4-9.fc26.src rubygem-recaptcha-0:3.4.0-1.fc26.src rubygem-rest-client-0:2.0.0-1.fc25.src rubygem-webrobots-0:0.1.2-2.fc24.src vagrant-0:1.8.7-1.fc26.src Sorry for any inconvenience. Vít [1] https://github.com/bblimke/webmock/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md#200

2 4

Orphaning rubygem-logging
by Vít Ondruch 01 Feb '17

01 Feb '17

Hi, I just updated and fixed rubygem-logging, but since I have no use for this package, I just orphaned it in PkgDb. Feel free to pick it up or let it go away ... Vít

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

ruby-sig February 2017