Bug #8623

Make stable Gem::Specification.files in default .gemspecs

Added by Vit Ondruch 9 months ago. Updated 2 months ago.

[ruby-core:55946]
Status:Closed
Priority:Normal
Assignee:Eric Hodel
Category:lib
Target version:-
ruby -v:ruby 2.0.0p195 (2013-05-14 revision 40734) [x86_64-linux] Backport:1.9.3: DONTNEED, 2.0.0: DONE

Description

Although the .gemspec files for default gems are same in function, the different order of their "s.files" makes them different therefore possibly conflicting in multilib scenario. Simple sorting fixes this issue.

Associated revisions

Revision 43587
Added by Nobuyoshi Nakada 5 months ago

rbinstall.rb: make stable files in .gemspec

  • tool/rbinstall.rb (Gem::Specification#collect): make stable Gem::Specification.files in default .gemspecs the different order of "files" in .gemspec files makes them different therefore possibly conflicting in multilib scenario. patch by vo.x (Vit Ondruch) at [Bug #8623].

History

#1 Updated by Yui NARUSE 9 months ago

  • Category set to lib
  • Status changed from Open to Assigned
  • Assignee set to Eric Hodel

#2 Updated by Vit Ondruch 7 months ago

Not sure why I did not attached patch, so here it is.

#3 Updated by Nobuyoshi Nakada 5 months ago

  • Status changed from Assigned to Closed
  • % Done changed from 0 to 100

This issue was solved with changeset r43587.
Vit, thank you for reporting this issue.
Your contribution to Ruby is greatly appreciated.
May Ruby be with you.


rbinstall.rb: make stable files in .gemspec

  • tool/rbinstall.rb (Gem::Specification#collect): make stable Gem::Specification.files in default .gemspecs the different order of "files" in .gemspec files makes them different therefore possibly conflicting in multilib scenario. patch by vo.x (Vit Ondruch) at [Bug #8623].

#4 Updated by Tomoyuki Chikanaga 5 months ago

  • Backport changed from 1.9.3: UNKNOWN, 2.0.0: UNKNOWN to 1.9.3: UNKNOWN, 2.0.0: REQUIRED

I've overlooked this ticket.

Hello vit, r43587 should be backported to ruby20_0, doesn't it?

#5 Updated by Vit Ondruch 5 months ago

nagachika (Tomoyuki Chikanaga) wrote:

I've overlooked this ticket.

Hello vit, r43587 should be backported to ruby20_0, doesn't it?

That would be sweet if you can backport. One less patch I need to maintain for Fedora.

#6 Updated by Tomoyuki Chikanaga 3 months ago

  • Backport changed from 1.9.3: UNKNOWN, 2.0.0: REQUIRED to 1.9.3: UNKNOWN, 2.0.0: DONE

r43587 was backported to ruby20_0 at r44567.

#7 Updated by Usaku NAKAMURA 2 months ago

  • Backport changed from 1.9.3: UNKNOWN, 2.0.0: DONE to 1.9.3: DONTNEED, 2.0.0: DONE

Also available in: Atom PDF