[Rubygems-developers] Specifying a platform
chad at chadfowler.com
Sat Apr 17 10:04:28 EDT 2004
On 17/4/2004, at 2:30 AM, Gavin Sinclair wrote:
> I'd like an opinion on the "platform" issue in RubyGems. I was
> surprised to get this error when trying out a gemspec for ruby-dict.
> $ gem -b ruby-dict.gemspec
> Attempting to build gem spec 'ruby-dict.gemspec'
> `validate': Missing value for att
> ribute platform (Gem::InvalidSpecificationException)
> /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/builder.rb:85:in `build'
> from /usr/local/bin/gem:494:in `build'
> from /usr/local/bin/gem:493:in `each'
> from /usr/local/bin/gem:493:in `build'
> from /usr/local/bin/gem:124:in `run'
> from /usr/local/bin/gem:679
> There are a few points to make here.
> 1. The error message given there is a bit fearsome. I'm not sure what
> the current policy on error messages is, but I'm sure this one can
> be improved. I'll take advice and then make the change myself.
This is just one of those bad error messages (stack traces) that hasn't
yet been cleaned up.
> 2. Why is a platform required? I understand platform to be "what kind
> of machine this can run on", which is fine, but what does "Ruby"
> mean as a platform? If a gem is platform-independent, does a
> platform need to be specified? If we must have "Ruby" meaning
> "platform-independent Ruby-based gem", can it be the default
> Platform suggests to me a binary gem, I suppose.
RUBY is indeed intended to mean that the gem is cross-platform. I
think RUBY being a default is a sensible way to go about it.
> 3. Naming. I've brought this up before, but buried within a thread.
> When I had "Gem::Platform::RUBY" specified as the platform for
> "ruby-dict", it built fine, but the gem was named
The addition of "-ruby-" in the name crept in quietly during one of the
enhancements someone (was it me?) was doing over the past month. I
feel like there's no reason to keep it for cross-platform gems, but
someone might have a reason they needed it. Is this true?
> That seems unappealing and unnecessary to me. If platform meant
> purely a binary gem, then I could understand seeing gem names like
> But I would prefer to see
I would prefer not to use characters that I have to escape in the shell.
tashi-delek:~ chadfowler$ touch test-(win32)
-bash: syntax error near unexpected token `('
> And I prefer never to see
> although the latter is more palatable :)
I guess it's a subjective difference, but the parentheses *really*
So, do we agree that we don't need -ruby- in the name of a gem?
More information about the Rubygems-developers