Le Wed, 22 May 2013 09:11:08 +1000, Matt Palmer <mpal...@debian.org> a écrit :
> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 01:35:55PM +0200, Laurent Bigonville wrote: > > I'm not sure this is a good idea as long as both ruby 1.8 and 1.9.1 > > are used. > > > > The user has the ability (using the alternatives) to switch between > > 1.8 and 1.9.1. So that means that even if 1.9.1 is installed, the > > user could still use 1.8 and the rubygems package might be missing. > > That's a possible issue. What if rubygems was a recommends? It'd > still be pulled in normally by default, but it would at least not > *block* removal of Ruby 1.8. Makes it rather difficult to do a sane > dependency chain, though. Vagrant package is not the only package that has a hard dependency against rubygems. I would say that the same solution should be applied to all the other package as well. > What does Vagrant even use rubygems for directly? It seems odd that > a tool to manage VMs would need to install gems itself. Rubygems is used to manage plugins that can be loaded in vagrant. I didn't really investigate how difficult is was to disable this feature. Cheers Laurent Bigonville -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
