Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2021 06:14:04 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: ruby@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 237833] lang/ruby26: irb, rdoc, ri is broken Message-ID: <bug-237833-21402-Up39A8YJ4l@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-237833-21402@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-237833-21402@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D237833 Sean Champ <lab+bsd@thinkum.space> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |lab+bsd@thinkum.space --- Comment #23 from Sean Champ <lab+bsd@thinkum.space> --- I've seen similar errors, I believe it may have something to do with how the Gem API resolves gemspec pathnames I think a lot of the issues might clear up with a newer ruby-gems version. = I've sent a patch for this https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D260780=20 For bundling with tools like irb, rdoc, etc. it should be possible to provi= de a meta-port. I'll hopefully have a patch put together for that, if it could b= e of any use - something that could depend on the Ruby implementation of a given default version and the ports that would provide the common Ruby platform t= ools - e.g including the tools for the bundler, erb, irb, racc, rake, rbs, rdoc,= and typeprof cmds, all of which are available via separate gems. I'm not sure if it might seem initially very convenient, but after trying o= ut some other approaches for installing a usable 'irb' locally, I believe it m= ay work out well to use the individual ports e.g for irb, rdoc, etc. Those por= ts may be available at their latest public release, contrasted to whatever ver= sion was included in the Ruby platform bundle of some version.=20 Considering the essential features of the ruby-gems port, in particular, the latest updates may provide some useful features e.g in affecting how the to= ols are launched from the console command line. Ideally, some bugs might go away after update, as such. For the sake of convenience for a new Ruby installation with FreeBSD, it sh= ould be possible to put together a meta-port that would draw all of these separa= te Ruby ports together. I don't believe I've found the only approach for this,= but I've been working on a new port for that - calling it lang/ruby-platform. Perhaps it's been tested enough that I could send a diff, for public review shortly, ostensibly for adding it to the ports tree or at least as a point = of discussion. The meta-port might depend on the ports providing the erb, irb, racc, rake, rbs, rdoc, and typeprof cmds such that might normally be available if everything works out in a new Ruby installation. To provide a single point = for installation, those could be installed as dependencies of the metaport, at their latest published version in ports. Of course, this would also pull in= any updates for the ruby-gems port. Then there are the bundled gems in a baseline Ruby install, such that don't have command line tools - e.g the rss gem, such that might be of interest f= or podcast stuff etc. Hopefully the ruby-gems update and the metaport might be of some use. I'll = try to put the metaport patch together, for one approach to this. Health, all - Sean --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-237833-21402-Up39A8YJ4l>