Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2018 17:31:31 -0700 From: Adam Weinberger <adamw@adamw.org> To: Pete Wright <pete@nomadlogic.org> Cc: Yasuhiro KIMURA <yasu@utahime.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Request for help: remove bundler from ruby 2.6 port Message-ID: <CAP7rwciPjGRY-SsXP8XaT479JrLY=m%2BRcwPrfF_tSb5HVbms=g@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <087f33fc-69b8-a4a1-a23e-e7c74af960f9@nomadlogic.org> References: <20181229.134412.1093009159948437947.yasu@utahime.org> <CAP7rwchJbtwuP-VLAxT11TgV9tOQweywcFFzYspFTsnyiZ5OMw@mail.gmail.com> <20181230.103514.1004952746059751135.yasu@utahime.org> <087f33fc-69b8-a4a1-a23e-e7c74af960f9@nomadlogic.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 5:27 PM Pete Wright <pete@nomadlogic.org> wrote: > > > > On 12/29/18 5:35 PM, Yasuhiro KIMURA wrote: > > From: Adam Weinberger <adamw@adamw.org> > > Subject: Re: Request for help: remove bundler from ruby 2.6 port > > Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2018 15:34:17 -0700 > > > >> I think perhaps it's worth considering doing the opposite and, > >> beginning with 2.6, install the entire standard library by default. > >> Gems and stdlib exist side-by-side without problem, and many of the > >> gems that are deleted are generally kept up-to-date. > >> > >> Even if we don't want to install the entire standard library, I'd at > >> least strongly argue for including the most important gems (rake, gem, > >> minitest, and bundler) by default. They are basic components of ruby > >> itself, and ports should provide //optional// newer versions of them. > > From: Pete Wright <pete@nomadlogic.org> > > Subject: Re: Request for help: remove bundler from ruby 2.6 port > > Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2018 16:41:32 -0800 > > > >> +1 from me on this. > >> > >> i think the benefits of lowering the porting overhead combined with > >> the fact that most ruby envs i've supported (and currently support) > >> are built around the expectation that rake, gem and bundler are all > >> available - so this would lower my administrative overhead as well. > > Thank you for reply. Then I'm going to create full port and post here > > again. But I'm away from this evening to next Saturday and can't > > access development environment during that time. So if someone else > > want to try it, please don't hesitate. > I was able to build this on 13-CURRENT/amd64 today without issues. the > ruby26 runtime seems OK after initial testing, but there is an issue > with bundler26: > > $ /usr/local/bin/bundle26 > Traceback (most recent call last): > 2: from /usr/local/bin/bundle26:23:in `<main>' > 1: from /usr/local/lib/ruby/2.6/rubygems.rb:302:in `activate_bin_path' > /usr/local/lib/ruby/2.6/rubygems.rb:283:in `find_spec_for_exe': can't > find gem bundler (>= 0.a) with executable bundle (Gem::GemNotFoundException) > > > i did verify that this package does not conflict with the existing > rubygem-bundler and ruby24 ports. > > as a starting place I have created this PR: > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234509 > > if i have time over the next couple days i'll take a closer look at how > bundler is being built and see if can fix the above issue. Bundler's whole purpose is to install gems using the 'gem' command, which the ruby port specifically excludes. So, all the Bundler stuff will have to be removed for the ruby26 port. Take a look at the Makefile where we delete all the rake-related stuff; Bundler should be removed in the same way. # Adam -- Adam Weinberger adamw@adamw.org https://www.adamw.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAP7rwciPjGRY-SsXP8XaT479JrLY=m%2BRcwPrfF_tSb5HVbms=g>