Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 184960 - installing rubygems fails because auto_gem is missing
Summary: installing rubygems fails because auto_gem is missing
Status: RESOLVED INVALID
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: [OLD] Development (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: High major
Assignee: Gentoo Linux bug wranglers
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2007-07-11 14:39 UTC by Patrick Huber
Modified: 2007-08-15 20:19 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Patrick Huber 2007-07-11 14:39:03 UTC
rubygems need a tool calles auto_gem that is bundled with rubygems. so to install the package you need to have it first. too bad, that auto_gem has been removed in newer version so you first need to install rubygems-0.9.2 which is the last version with this tool and then you can upgrade to the latest version...


Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. emerge -C rubygems
2. emerge rubygems # will fail because of missing auto_gem
3. env-update && source /etc/profile # as advised by the emerge -C action
4. emerge rubygems # still fails
5. ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~x86 emerge =rubygems-0.9.2 # works, installs auto_gem
6. emerge rubygems # works now because auto_gem is now present, but with upgrading we're removing auto_gem again...
Actual Results:  
emerging fails, see steps to reproduce

Expected Results:  
emerge rubygems should work right away
Comment 1 Jakub Moc (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2007-07-11 14:44:39 UTC
unset RUBYOPT
Comment 2 Patrick Huber 2007-07-11 15:17:22 UTC
where does that come from and why? automatically removing it when installing a new version would be a nice thing to do, wouldn't it?
Comment 3 Richard Freeman gentoo-dev 2007-08-15 20:19:26 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> where does that come from and why? automatically removing it when installing a
> new version would be a nice thing to do, wouldn't it?
> 

It looks like they tried to do this in bug 158455.

Not sure what happened since...