[Rubygems-developers] [ rubygems-Bugs-27087 ] Rubygems 1.3.5 and Ruby 1.9 breaks hard after require 'rubygems/specification'

noreply at rubyforge.org noreply at rubyforge.org
Wed Apr 21 23:54:27 EDT 2010


Bugs item #27087, was opened at 2009-09-10 13:34
You can respond by visiting: 
http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=575&aid=27087&group_id=126

Category: #gem and #require methods
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
>Priority: 1
Submitted By: Rob Sanheim (rsanheim)
Assigned to: Eric Hodel (drbrain)
Summary: Rubygems 1.3.5 and Ruby 1.9 breaks hard after require 'rubygems/specification'

Initial Comment:
Please see the repo:

http://github.com/rsanheim/ruby19_rubygems_bug/tree/master

The build is here:

http://runcoderun.com/rsanheim/ruby19_rubygems_bug

The failing build on Ruby 1.9.1 p243:

http://runcoderun.com/rsanheim/ruby19_rubygems_bug

http://runcoderun.com/rsanheim/ruby19_rubygems_bug/builds/09a9f683fe7848980e10ac7bd2291040ec11ea17/1/ruby_191

Here is the simplest code to illustrate:

  require 'hoe'
  gem 'hoe' # these should work

  puts "about to break 'gem'"  
  require 'rubygems/specification'
  gem 'hoe' # exception thrown here when it shouldn't be


----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Eric Hodel (drbrain)
Date: 2010-04-21 20:54

Message:
I'm not entirely sure how this is breaking, but require 'rubygems' provides Gem::Specification, so you don't need to require it.  The workaround is to not require 'rubygems/specification'.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Ryan Davis (zenspider)
Date: 2009-09-11 00:30

Message:
We've already tracked down the problem. The workaround as described is to remove your manually installed rubygems from 1.9.x. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Adam Salter (aqsalter)
Date: 2009-09-10 23:33

Message:
Ryan: Sorry about that. I (too) am working on several projects, busy and wanted to throw in my helpful comments... I find problems can get fixed quicker if the devs know how many people are affected.

I misunderstood your initial comment: 

'0 failures out of 4' sounds like no failures, which could certainly be assumed to be a good thing - except we are trying to track down a problem.

+1 biting off a much ruder comment and looking to the future with hope and optimism.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Ryan Davis (zenspider)
Date: 2009-09-10 23:08

Message:
Please don't +1. That shit is obnoxious.

We don't need to test this against jeweler if we have a much cleaner smaller repro that is standalone.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Adam Salter (aqsalter)
Date: 2009-09-10 18:47

Message:
+1 please fix... Not exactly 'urgent' but annoying.

I raised a bug on the 'jeweler' gem because of this:

http://github.com/technicalpickles/jeweler/issues#issue/34

I'm sure that the code i provide there:

Rakefile: require 'jeweler'

rake -T

will trigger issue.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Ryan Davis (zenspider)
Date: 2009-09-10 13:54

Message:
Huh!

% sudo gem uninstall rubygems-update
% multiruby -rubygems -rrubygems/specification -e 'gem "hoe"'
...
TOTAL RESULT = 0 failures out of 4

Passed: 1.9.1-p129, 1.8.7-p72, 1.8.7-p160, 1.8.6-p368


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Ryan Davis (zenspider)
Date: 2009-09-10 13:53

Message:
Easier repro of the warnings:

multiruby -rubygems -rrubygems/specification -e 0

and:

multiruby -rubygems -rrubygems/specification -e 'gem "hoe"'


----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=575&aid=27087&group_id=126


More information about the Rubygems-developers mailing list