From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: kevin.mark@verizon.net (Kevin Mark)
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 02:54:57 -0400
Subject: [sup-talk] unable to sup-sync (new install)
In-Reply-To: <20070918063852.GB3384@die.therning.org>
References: <20070917032644.GD27677@horacrux> <1190048921-sup-8612@south>
	<20070918063852.GB3384@die.therning.org>
Message-ID: <20070918065457.GF22902@horacrux>

On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 07:38:52AM +0100, Magnus Therning wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 10:12:15 -0700, William Morgan wrote:
> >Excerpts from Kevin Mark's message of Sun Sep 16 20:26:44 -0700 2007:
> >> sudo gem install sup -y
> >> 
> >> To run 'sup', I needed to add 'export
> >> PATH=/var/lib/gems/1.8/bin:"${PATH}"' to .bashrc
> >
> >This is a symptom of how Ubuntu deals with gems. Unfortunately there's
> >not a lot I can do about it from my end.
> 
> There is one thing you _can_ do--make sup easy to package by providing a
> setup.rb or install.rb for installation.
> 
> Ruby gems and Python eggs seem to suffer from the same problem; they
> don't just deal with packaging but also with versioning and they do it
> in a way that makes packaging in Linux distros difficult.
> 
> See http://pkg-ruby-extras.alioth.debian.org/rubygems.html for Debian's
> position on gems.
> 
> /M
If my understanding is correct, these 'gems' thingies are packages which
are outside of the perview of dpkg or other packaging system. Which
means it would be great if someone found a way for their status to be
communicated to the packaging system?

-- 
|  .''`.  == Debian GNU/Linux == |       my web site:           |
| : :' :      The  Universal     |mysite.verizon.net/kevin.mark/|
| `. `'      Operating System    | go to counter.li.org and     |
|   `-    http://www.debian.org/ |    be counted! #238656       |
|  my keyserver: subkeys.pgp.net |     my NPO: cfsg.org         |
|join the new debian-community.org to help Debian!              |
|_______  Unless I ask to be CCd, assume I am subscribed _______|