Skip to content

Fix default gemspec file list for extension gems #9673

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Conversation

deivid-rodriguez
Copy link
Contributor

@deivid-rodriguez deivid-rodriguez commented Jan 24, 2024

@deivid-rodriguez
Copy link
Contributor Author

I also added an extra change to generate requirable features directly in this file list (without lib/ in front) consistently for all default gems. This way, we'll be able to eventually stop supporting the other format in RubyGems (see https://github.com/rubygems/rubygems/blob/53604cb26e23ad9b6b81b8c7eb909f5ac5d4e5fe/lib/rubygems.rb#L1182-L1215).

@hsbt hsbt self-requested a review January 31, 2024 22:01
@hsbt hsbt self-assigned this Feb 5, 2024
@hsbt
Copy link
Member

hsbt commented Feb 5, 2024

Sorry to late response. I'll look tomorrow.

@hsbt
Copy link
Member

hsbt commented Feb 7, 2024

I confirmed this change to add .so files into spec.files and remove lib/ prefix to .rb files for default gems. But I have some concerns. Sorry after my approval.

I checked all of gemspec with this PR and without one.

https://gist.github.com/hsbt/520371620754e4be7ce01d358598b6c4

I found two things:

  • cgi/escape.bundle is not located on cgi.gemspec. Is it intentional?
  • io/console.bundle is located with console.bundle without io/ prefix. Is it also intentional?

@deivid-rodriguez
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for checking! No, it's not expected. I will have a look and try to fix those 👍.

@deivid-rodriguez deivid-rodriguez force-pushed the fix-default-gemspec-file-list-for-extension-gems branch 2 times, most recently from 5e62374 to 4b3f332 Compare March 20, 2024 17:20
@deivid-rodriguez
Copy link
Contributor Author

@hsbt I looked into both issues, I think it should be correct now!

@deivid-rodriguez deivid-rodriguez force-pushed the fix-default-gemspec-file-list-for-extension-gems branch from 4b3f332 to 126e51a Compare March 21, 2024 11:17
@hsbt
Copy link
Member

hsbt commented Mar 22, 2024

@deivid-rodriguez Thanks. I'll look this at next week.

@hsbt
Copy link
Member

hsbt commented Mar 25, 2024

@deivid-rodriguez I confirmed to fix my comment.

https://gist.github.com/hsbt/91aa79a2bfdf14ba95cb83e262ab41b8

Let's try this.

@hsbt hsbt merged commit ea31228 into ruby:master Mar 25, 2024
98 checks passed
@hsbt
Copy link
Member

hsbt commented Mar 25, 2024

This change leads to fail with cross-build. https://rubyci.s3.amazonaws.com/crossruby/crossruby-master-arm/log/20240325T034328Z.fail.html.gz

I'll look that.

hsbt added a commit to hsbt/ruby that referenced this pull request Mar 25, 2024
We should fix ruby#9673 for Ruby 3.3.1
@deivid-rodriguez deivid-rodriguez deleted the fix-default-gemspec-file-list-for-extension-gems branch March 25, 2024 14:01
@deivid-rodriguez
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks! Let me know if help is needed with that failure.

@MSP-Greg
Copy link
Contributor

MSP-Greg commented Mar 25, 2024

This breaks Windows builds.

Below is only ucrt build, note that no extension gems are listed. First noticed in ruby-loco, as the 'CLI test' failed.

Windows mswin builds have the same problem, but the 'Windows' CI doesn't run make install. I am just now looking at the code...

Last master CI before this was committed:
https://github.com/ruby/ruby/actions/runs/8413725202/job/23036373402#step:9:293

PR CI:
https://github.com/ruby/ruby/actions/runs/8374059044/job/22928452926#step:9:294

CI in master:
https://github.com/ruby/ruby/actions/runs/8414422750/job/23038070877#step:9:290

@hsbt
Copy link
Member

hsbt commented Mar 26, 2024

@MSP-Greg Thanks. I fixed it with b39057f

hsbt added a commit to hsbt/ruby that referenced this pull request Mar 26, 2024
@MSP-Greg
Copy link
Contributor

@hsbt Thank you for the quick fix. As you've probably seen, fixed the CI here. All three ruby-loco builds also passed...

@deivid-rodriguez
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thank you both!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants