patching rubygems

[Stanislav Sedov]

On Jul 28, 2012, at 5:28 PM, Steve Wills <swills at FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> I've done some more work on the issue of patching rubygems and have
> produced the attached patch. I'm doing some testing by building all the
> rubygem- ports on 9.0 with both 1.9 and 1.8 as default ruby. The build
> with ruby 1.9 finished and the patch has only caused issues building the
> following ports:
> 
> devel/rubygem-analogger
> devel/rubygem-clio
> devel/rubygem-rapt
> graphics/rubygem-captcha
> japanese/rubygem-jpmobile
> net-im/rubygem-earthquake
> science/rubygem-ai4r
> security/rubygem-ezcrypto
> www/rubygem-scrubyt
> 
> The batch with ruby 1.9 hasn't finished yet, but I don't expect it to
> find many more issues.
> 
> The basic idea is we extract and then build the gem rather than just
> installing the built gem. This gives us a chance to patch the gem in
> between the extract and build. We could for example change the
> dependencies of a port of we know it works with newer version of the
> other gems it depends on. This would make updating some gems much easier
> and should only make the build time very slightly longer.
> 
> We'd of course want to get an exp-run done before committing this, and
> at this point I'm not sure if there's time to get this in before 9.1 or
> not, but it would be nice.
> 
> Comments?
> 

Thanks for the patch!  I like the idea, though I'm not sure if it makes
sense to unpack all the gems we build.  Won't it be better to unpack
just those gems we have patches for, and use the old code path for
gems that do not require patching?

Also, I don't really like the "rm -rf $WRKDIR" line.  It looks scary.
Is it necessary to delete it and create it again?  Besides, WRKDIR
should probably be quoted, otherwise bad things might happen if it
contains spaces (and probably all of the other variables too).

Thanks!

--
ST4096-RIPE