I have released ruby 1.9.3_p125 into [extra].
This is a version bump (p0 -> p125) and all tests passed for me. Along with the update, I will be introducing the following new conventions as part of my ruby cleanup project.
/usr/lib/ruby/vendor_ruby is now the correct location where non-gem ruby libraries installed with pacman should go. If your package installs anything to /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby, you have to update to the new location. Site_ruby is only there for files installed specifically by the user without a package manager.
A new file will be created at "/etc/gemrc" where I add --user-install as the default option for gem. This will install all gems by default to "$HOME/.gem/ruby". You will have to add the new bindir to your PATH if you decide to install gems that provide binaries. export PATH="$PATH:$(ruby -rubygems -e 'puts Gem.user_dir')/bin"
As a result of the above change, all ruby gem packages will have to add a --no-user-install flag when running gem in the PKGBUILD.
If you run sudo gem install foo, it will install to /root/.gem/ruby To install to the system-wide gems location (not recommended), you will have to either remove --user-install from /etc/gemrc or you will have to pass the --no-user-install flag when using gem as root.
Cheers!
Could someone please orphan the hdapsd package in the AUR?I've added multiple hard drive support and systemd support topackage and would like to adopt it. It has not been updated for2 years by the current maintainer. Link to package: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=5401 Thanks in advance!Xiao-Long Chen
On 25 February 2012 21:45, 小龙 陈 chillermillerlong@hotmail.com wrote:
Could someone please orphan the hdapsd package in the AUR?I've added multiple hard drive support and systemd support topackage and would like to adopt it. It has not been updated for2 years by the current maintainer. Link to package: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=5401 Thanks in advance!Xiao-Long Chen
Have you tried to contact maintainer first? The common approach is to give maintainer two weeks to respond and then the package is orphaned.
Lukas
Yes, I've sent an email about two months ago, but never received a reply.
Xiao-Long Chen
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 10:48:57 +0100 From: l.jirkovsky@gmail.com To: aur-general@archlinux.org Subject: Re: [aur-general] Please orphan hdapsd
On 25 February 2012 21:45, 小龙 陈 chillermillerlong@hotmail.com wrote:
Could someone please orphan the hdapsd package in the AUR?I've added multiple hard drive support and systemd support topackage and would like to adopt it. It has not been updated for2 years by the current maintainer. Link to package: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=5401 Thanks in advance!Xiao-Long Chen
Have you tried to contact maintainer first? The common approach is to give maintainer two weeks to respond and then the package is orphaned.
Lukas
Hi,
Disowned. Thanks.
Thank you very much!
From: rodseth@gmail.com Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 19:39:13 +0100 To: aur-general@archlinux.org Subject: Re: [aur-general] Please orphan hdapsd
Hi,
Disowned. Thanks.
-- Cordially, Alexander Rødseth Arch Linux Trusted User (xyproto on IRC, trontonic on AUR)
On Saturday 25 Feb 2012 13:43:39 Thomas Dziedzic wrote:
I have released ruby 1.9.3_p125 into [extra].
Great work, Thomas.
As a result of the above change, all ruby gem packages will have to add a --no-user-install flag when running gem in the PKGBUILD.
Aaahh, ha haa.. I hadn't quite realised this when we were discussing this before. This is going to affect a lot of packages... where will they install things within the $pkgdir structure without this flag? I guess it will depend on how the package is being built.. (i.e. using devtools, makepkg as a user etc...)?
Is there a way to generate a list of packages that this affects? I.e. all those which use gem to install stuff within the PKGBUILD?
Pete.
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Peter Lewis plewis@aur.archlinux.org wrote:
On Saturday 25 Feb 2012 13:43:39 Thomas Dziedzic wrote:
I have released ruby 1.9.3_p125 into [extra].
Great work, Thomas.
As a result of the above change, all ruby gem packages will have to add a --no-user-install flag when running gem in the PKGBUILD.
Aaahh, ha haa.. I hadn't quite realised this when we were discussing this before. This is going to affect a lot of packages... where will they install things within the $pkgdir structure without this flag? I guess it will depend on how the package is being built.. (i.e. using devtools, makepkg as a user etc...)?
Is there a way to generate a list of packages that this affects? I.e. all those which use gem to install stuff within the PKGBUILD?
Pete.
I have already fixed the only 2 that are affected in repos: ruby-rack & ruby-pkgconfig
The rest of the pkgs that are affected are in the AUR.
On Saturday 25 Feb 2012 15:36:33 Thomas Dziedzic wrote:
I have already fixed the only 2 that are affected in repos: ruby-rack & ruby-pkgconfig
The rest of the pkgs that are affected are in the AUR.
Good to hear, but yes I'd imagine there are a fair number in the AUR too. I'm wondering if this notice is enough, or if we just let them find out slowly...
Could we, for example, drop a comment on packages with "gem" in the PKGBUILD? Is that feasible? Desirable?
Pete.
On 02/26/2012 01:28 AM, Peter Lewis wrote:
On Saturday 25 Feb 2012 15:36:33 Thomas Dziedzic wrote:
I have already fixed the only 2 that are affected in repos: ruby-rack & ruby-pkgconfig
The rest of the pkgs that are affected are in the AUR.
Good to hear, but yes I'd imagine there are a fair number in the AUR too. I'm wondering if this notice is enough, or if we just let them find out slowly...
Could we, for example, drop a comment on packages with "gem" in the PKGBUILD? Is that feasible? Desirable?
Pete.
$ git clone --depth=1 git://pkgbuild.com/aur-mirror.git $ cd aur-mirror $ git grep --not -e "user-install" --and -e " gem " | cut -f1 -d"/" | uniq $ profit
I get 264, the majority having a ruby- prefix.
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Peter Lewis plewis@aur.archlinux.org wrote:
On Saturday 25 Feb 2012 13:43:39 Thomas Dziedzic wrote:
I have released ruby 1.9.3_p125 into [extra].
Great work, Thomas.
As a result of the above change, all ruby gem packages will have to add a --no-user-install flag when running gem in the PKGBUILD.
Aaahh, ha haa.. I hadn't quite realised this when we were discussing this before. This is going to affect a lot of packages... where will they install things within the $pkgdir structure without this flag? I guess it will depend on how the package is being built.. (i.e. using devtools, makepkg as a user etc...)?
This only affects gem pkgbuilds, this means that fixing all of the requires appending --no-user-install inside the PKGBUILD
Is there a way to generate a list of packages that this affects? I.e. all those which use gem to install stuff within the PKGBUILD?
Pete.
aur-general@lists.archlinux.org