RFC: Replacing graphics/ruby-rmagick with graphics/rubygem-rmagick

Stanislav Sedov stas at FreeBSD.org
Mon Aug 1 07:40:59 UTC 2011

On Sun, 31 Jul 2011 15:58:00 -0400
Ryan Steinmetz <zi at FreeBSD.org> mentioned:
> Perhaps the attached shar(1) meets the needs of both?
> I compared the locations of the files that ruby-rmagick installs with the gem and
> simply generate symlinks to fill in the gaps.
> The end result is that the rubygem port should be able to meet the needs
> of both.
> -require rmagick should work
> -rmagick is registered as a gem and available to other gems
> If others agree on the tactic, it's possible that we could incorporate
> the concept into bsd.ruby.mk and automatically enable it via a knob.
> Then, simply convert everything else to use the rubygems framework.

Thanks, his looks like one of possible solutions.  I'm not sure we will be
able to propagate something like this into the bsd.ruby.mk though, as it
might not be always clear which files to symlink where.

There's another problem with gems though -- the lack of customisability.
If we convert rmagick to gem, we won't be able to apply custom patches
to it, or it will be extremely difficult.  E.g. right now we apply
some patches to accomodate our ImageMagick version and to make ruby-rmagick
port PREFIX clean (that is that it will install into any prefix, even different
from where the ruby port was installed).  How would we handle this with
the gem version (or any other problems we'll need to fix) -- I don't know.

Is there any way we can patch this snorby to pick up the rmagick version
installed from ports instead of querying the gem database?

Stanislav Sedov

()  ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail 
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   - against proprietary attachments

More information about the freebsd-ruby mailing list