[Rubygems-developers] Confusion on the use of 'executables' in
chad at chadfowler.com
Sat Sep 11 08:36:57 EDT 2004
On Sep 10, 2004, at 11:57 PM, Jim Weirich wrote:
> It has come to my attention that there is some confusion about the use
> "executables" (and possibly "default_executable"). Should the values
> executables be
> 1) the basename of the executable file, or
> 2) the bindir + basename ?
> Previous to 0.8.0 I believe (1) to be the case (at least that's what
> rake gem does). However the files accessor (which returns a list of
> needed for the gem) puts the unadorned executable names in the list of
> files (e.g. it adds "rake" instead of "bin/rake" to the file list).
> causes problems with rake because it doesn't know what to do the
> file name. Option (2) doesn't work either because then the executable
> stub installer gets the directories wrong.
> I'm thinking (1) is correct and that the files accessor should add
> to the executable before adding it to the list of files.
Yes, I think this was an oversight when specification.rb was revamped.
I just put it back in.
Of course, you can set #executables to
full/relative/path/executable_name, but you shouldn't set bindir in
More information about the Rubygems-developers