[Rubygems-developers] Is a "pure" platform needed?

Tony Arcieri tony.arcieri at medioh.com
Mon Sep 13 14:26:05 EDT 2010

On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 3:51 PM, James Tucker <jftucker at gmail.com> wrote:

> We need to add a feature to really support this. The problem is, gems that
> fail to build although left on the filesystem for debugging purposes and to
> allow access to the build logs, they are not added to the installed index,
> and as such are not loadable except under old gem_prelude bugs.

This was why I was suggesting it be solved at the platform level as opposed
to trying to solve it within the gem itself.

The idea would be that on platforms with support for native extensions,
RubyGems would look for gems by platform in the following order:

1. A platform-native gem
2. The "ruby" platform
3. The "pure" platform

On platforms without native extensions, it'd check for:

1. A platform-native gem
2. The "pure" platform
3. The "ruby" platform (for legacy's sake)

This would allow tools like Bundler to automatically choose the right set of
dependencies for a given platform and avoid it ever trying to install gems
with native extensions at all.

Tony Arcieri
Medioh! A Kudelski Brand

More information about the Rubygems-developers mailing list