https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/favicon.ico?17113305112010-12-31T17:17:26ZRuby Issue Tracking SystemBackport192 - Backport #4228: Backward gemspec compatibility change in r29663 broke rake gemshttps://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/4228?journal_id=149702010-12-31T17:17:26Zzenspider (Ryan Davis)
<ul></ul><p>=begin<br>
Didn't we get you commit bit?<br>
=end</p> Backport192 - Backport #4228: Backward gemspec compatibility change in r29663 broke rake gemshttps://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/4228?journal_id=149712010-12-31T17:19:48Zzenspider (Ryan Davis)
<ul></ul><p>=begin</p>
<p>On Dec 31, 2010, at 00:17 , Ryan Davis wrote:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Issue <a class="issue tracker-4 status-5 priority-4 priority-default closed" title="Backport: Backward gemspec compatibility change in r29663 broke rake gems (Closed)" href="https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/4228">#4228</a> has been updated by Ryan Davis.</p>
<p>Didn't we get you commit bit?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I spoke out of turn... As I hit "comment" I realized he was only talking about the backport of the patch itself.</p>
<p>=end</p> Backport192 - Backport #4228: Backward gemspec compatibility change in r29663 broke rake gemshttps://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/4228?journal_id=152712011-01-16T22:22:43Zyugui (Yuki Sonoda)yugui@yugui.jp
<ul></ul><p>=begin<br>
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 7:11 AM, Luis Lavena <a href="mailto:redmine@ruby-lang.org" class="email">redmine@ruby-lang.org</a> wrote:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Problem is, in r29663, when backported for release, the old non-version gemspec are kept along the versioned ones, defeating the purpose of the previous fix.</p>
<p>Now, after installing a gem that was bundled, it breaks rake, again:</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Yeah, I finally realized what was wrong in my commit. That's because<br>
rubygems generates a new "rake" file in its bin_path, isn't that?<br>
I committed your patch at r30579.</p>
<p>Thank you for the reporting. and sorry for replying so late.</p>
<p>--<br>
Yuki Sonoda (Yugui)<br>
<a href="mailto:yugui@yugui.jp" class="email">yugui@yugui.jp</a><br>
<a href="http://yugui.jp" class="external">http://yugui.jp</a></p>
<p>=end</p> Backport192 - Backport #4228: Backward gemspec compatibility change in r29663 broke rake gemshttps://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/4228?journal_id=152732011-01-16T22:27:06Zyugui (Yuki Sonoda)yugui@yugui.jp
<ul><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>Open</i> to <i>Closed</i></li><li><strong>% Done</strong> changed from <i>0</i> to <i>100</i></li></ul><p>=begin<br>
This issue was solved with changeset r30579.<br>
Luis, thank you for reporting this issue.<br>
Your contribution to Ruby is greatly appreciated.<br>
May Ruby be with you.</p>
<hr>
<ul>
<li>too/rbinstall.rb (install?(:ext, :comm, :gem)): no longer<br>
installs no-versioned gempsecs. <a href="/issues/4228">[ruby-core:34011]</a><br>
Patch by Luis Lavena.<br>
=end</li>
</ul> Backport192 - Backport #4228: Backward gemspec compatibility change in r29663 broke rake gemshttps://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/4228?journal_id=152742011-01-16T22:43:43Zluislavena (Luis Lavena)luislavena@gmail.com
<ul></ul><p>=begin<br>
On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Yugui <a href="mailto:yugui@yugui.jp" class="email">yugui@yugui.jp</a> wrote:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Yeah, I finally realized what was wrong in my commit. That's because<br>
rubygems generates a new "rake" file in its bin_path, isn't that?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Yes, something once we are in sync with RubyGems will deal with<br>
(double-installation issue)</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I committed your patch at r30579.</p>
</blockquote>
<a name="Thank-you"></a>
<h2 >Thank you!<a href="#Thank-you" class="wiki-anchor">¶</a></h2>
<h2>Luis Lavena<br>
AREA 17</h2>
<p>Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add,<br>
but rather when there is nothing more to take away.<br>
Antoine de Saint-Exupéry</p>
<p>=end</p>