On Donnerstag, 2. Mai 2013, 00:19:15 wrote Troy Telford:
On 2013-05-02 04:49:02 +0000, Adrian Schröter said:
On Mittwoch, 1. Mai 2013, 18:49:32 wrote Troy Telford:
I'm pretty sure this isn't the right plact to o
something missing here?
Maybe ;)
I had accidentally fat-fingered 'send.'
Then I couldn't post a follow-up stating that, so I decided to wait for a couple of hours and post a reply.
The biggest issue I found is in the RPM packaging:
I had OBS 2.3; Ruby 1.8.something. I was using the openSUSE:Tools repo.
Upon upgrading, I found that the 'ruby-1.9' package had a linking error: /usr/bin/ruby was linked against libruby-1.8.so (or something like that).
Yes, that is a general bug in our ruby packaging :/ I need to talk with our ruby people about that. Please note that the same packages are working on fresh install, just the update path is broken due to all the ghost files in ruby package.
This brought OBS to a screeching halt, as 'ruby' couldn't run.
I dug up the srpm, and found that the most of the contents of the 'ruby-1.9' package were mostly %ghost files - including ruby, rake.
Which is why my 'rpm -qf /usr/bin/ruby' was showing 'ruby-1.9' as having the old ruby binary.
What appears to have happened is that when I upgraded from Ruby 1.8, the Ruby 1.8 binaries were left in place (somehow). As the 'ruby-1.9' package had these binaries as %ghost, it appears to have 'adopted' the old ruby 1.8 binaries. It took me a while to figure that out, as I had difficulty believing that was what had happened.
Finally, I decided to take a look at update-alternatives --list ruby.
The alternatives system wouldn't update the symlinks, as the ruby 1.8 binaries were still in place (even though the ruby 1.8 package(s) were uninstalled).
After removing the old/bad binaries, and re-running update-alternatives for the entire (but short) list of binaries that were %ghost(ed) in the ruby-1.9 package, all was well.
I'm not sure if it's a packaging problem per se, but it's likely something someone else will run into when they upgrade. If nothing else, it's "documented" in the mailing list.
As you can see, I read mails sequential :) From my POV this definitive a packaging bug, but as it is in our generic ruby packages, we need to discuss that on the ruby mailing list... -- Adrian Schroeter SUSE Linux Products GmbH email: adrian@suse.de -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+owner@opensuse.org