On 15 January 2012 18:21, Michael Orlitzky <mich...@orlitzky.com> wrote: > On 01/15/2012 05:24 PM, Hilco Wijbenga wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> The dev-ruby/rubygems ebuild adds "-rauto_gem" to the global RUBYOPT. >> This breaks my own scripts so I have removed it from /etc/env.d. So >> far, so good. >> >> I just tried upgrading dev-ruby/json and it failed because I did not >> have RUBYOPT set. Obviously, the "fix" was easy but now I'm wondering >> ... is this really the best approach? >> >> It does not seem like a good idea that the rubygems ebuild sets >> RUBYOPT and subsequent (Ruby Gems related) emerges break without it. >> Would it not be simpler and more reliable if ebuilds that need it >> simply execute "export RUBYOPT=..." prior to running? Why does it have >> to be in the global environment, forcing it on every user? >> >> If there is a requirement for this to be in the global environment, >> what is the consequence of unsetting RUBYOPT in my own .bashrc (or >> similar)? Is that "safe"? Or does that break something that I simply >> haven't noticed yet? >> > > (1) I don't know much about ruby packaging > > (2) Keeping (1) in mind, I agree with you
Good. Thanks. > (3) You're asking the wrong people > > Try asking on the -dev list, or filing a bug. They'll just close it if it's > considered invalid. Yeah, I went back and forth. I figured (hoped?) that gentoo-dev is (more or less) a subset of gentoo-user so I should reach (most of) the devs this way too. Maybe I'm naive. :-) We have too many open bugs already so I'll wait until (hopefully) I see a few more responses before I file a bug. That way there's less chance of an invalid bug and I may save some valuable dev time. > This bit me once long ago: ruby scripts running from cron don't have their > RUBYOPT set, so scripts that normally work "magically" fail. Since I never > set RUBYOPT myself, I didn't expect it to be set. Of course, I just forgot > to require rubygems in my script.
