Summary: | dev-lang/ruby-2.4.5: lib/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:55:in `require': cannot load such file -- openssl.so (LoadError) | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Rolf Eike Beer <eike> |
Component: | Current packages | Assignee: | Gentoo Ruby Team <ruby> |
Status: | CONFIRMED --- | ||
Severity: | normal | ||
Priority: | Normal | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Attachments: | build.log |
Description
Rolf Eike Beer
2018-12-15 11:16:40 UTC
It looks like you are trying to build without ssl support. That isn't a recommended configuration, but I guess that if we offer it it should work. The bug has been referenced in the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=dcdb66f17443bec328badb5dce608ed1baec7f3c commit dcdb66f17443bec328badb5dce608ed1baec7f3c Author: Hans de Graaff <graaff@gentoo.org> AuthorDate: 2018-12-16 07:33:29 +0000 Commit: Hans de Graaff <graaff@gentoo.org> CommitDate: 2018-12-16 07:33:29 +0000 dev-lang/ruby: enable ssl USE by default Upstream expects this to be present and a ruby without ssl support has a really crippled environment (e.g. it won't be possible to install gems via rubygems or bundler). Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/673176 Signed-off-by: Hans de Graaff <graaff@gentoo.org> Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.51, Repoman-2.3.11 dev-lang/ruby/ruby-2.4.5-r1.ebuild | 2 +- dev-lang/ruby/ruby-2.4.5.ebuild | 2 +- dev-lang/ruby/ruby-2.5.3.ebuild | 2 +- 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) I can't reproduce this, and the build.log shows something weird. It refers to /usr/lib/ruby/2.4.0/openssl.rb but that file should not exist when compiled with USE=-ssl. At the same time, if it exists then openssl.so should also exist (in /usr/lib64/ruby/2.4.0/x86_64-linux/openssl.so on amd64). So something weird is going on with the version that is already installed, it seems. Can you investigate this some more? My suggestion would be to not let this block stabling since USE=-ssl should be a very rare installation in the first place. I used tatt and that built this order: FEATURES=' test' USE='' succeeded for =dev-lang/ruby-2.4.5 USE='-berkdb -doc examples -gdbm ipv6 rdoc -rubytests -socks5 -ssl -static-libs -tk -xemacs' succeeded for =dev-lang/ruby-2.4.5 USE='-berkdb doc -examples -gdbm -ipv6 -rdoc -rubytests -socks5 ssl static-libs -tk -xemacs' succeeded for =dev-lang/ruby-2.4.5 USE='berkdb -doc -examples gdbm -ipv6 rdoc -rubytests socks5 -ssl static-libs tk -xemacs' failed for =dev-lang/ruby-2.4.5 USE='-berkdb -doc -examples -gdbm -ipv6 -rdoc -rubytests -socks5 ssl static-libs tk -xemacs' succeeded for =dev-lang/ruby-2.4.5 USE='berkdb -doc examples -gdbm ipv6 rdoc rubytests socks5 ssl static-libs tk -xemacs' failed for =dev-lang/ruby-2.4.5 USE='-berkdb doc -examples gdbm ipv6 -rdoc rubytests socks5 -ssl -static-libs -tk xemacs' failed for =dev-lang/ruby-2.4.5 USE='-berkdb -doc -examples -gdbm -ipv6 -rdoc -rubytests socks5 ssl -static-libs -tk xemacs' failed for =dev-lang/ruby-2.4.5 USE='-berkdb doc -examples gdbm -ipv6 -rdoc rubytests socks5 ssl -static-libs -tk xemacs' failed for =dev-lang/ruby-2.4.5 USE='berkdb doc -examples -gdbm -ipv6 -rdoc -rubytests -socks5 -ssl -static-libs tk xemacs' failed for =dev-lang/ruby-2.4.5 log has been saved as /root/tatt/logs/dev-lang_ruby-2.4.5_use_bRwKH USE='-berkdb doc -examples -gdbm -ipv6 -rdoc -rubytests -socks5 ssl -static-libs tk xemacs' succeeded for =dev-lang/ruby-2.4.5 USE='berkdb doc -examples gdbm ipv6 -rdoc rubytests -socks5 ssl -static-libs tk xemacs' succeeded for =dev-lang/ruby-2.4.5 USE='berkdb -doc -examples -gdbm ipv6 -rdoc rubytests socks5 -ssl static-libs tk xemacs' failed for =dev-lang/ruby-2.4.5 Where the failure is what is reported here. If you say it's no blocker I'll happily go on. (In reply to Rolf Eike Beer from comment #4) > Where the failure is what is reported here. If you say it's no blocker I'll > happily go on. Yes, please continue, but leave this bug open since we should fix this, either by removing the USE flag or by properly dealing with its absence. |