'gem install instiki-0.10.0' does not pull in dependencies - why?

Oops! I sent this message from the wrong mail account and didn't notice until
now. So here it is again...

···

---------- Forwarded Message ----------

Subject: Re: 'gem install instiki-0.10.0' does not pull in dependencies - why?
Date: Thursday 07 April 2005 07:32 am
From: Jim Weirich <jweirich@one.net>
To: ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org

On Thursday 07 April 2005 02:20 am, Alexey Verkhovsky wrote:

I have a problem with this gem (about to be released Instiki 0.10):
http://alexeyv.textdriven.com/instiki-0.10.0.gem
It has external dependencies:

[...]

and yet, when I try to install it, it gets installed without them.

[...]

E:\>gem install --both --include-dependencies instiki-0.10.0.gem
Attempting local installation of 'instiki-0.10.0.gem'
Successfully installed instiki, version 0.10.0

Gems has two installers, a local gems installer and a remote gems installer.
The remote installer will download dependencies, the local installer does
not.

This is the next big item fix on my todo list for RubyGems: the merging of
the two installers into a single installer that can fetch locally or
remotely (from more than one remote source ... another limitation of the
current remote installer).

--
-- Jim Weirich jim@weirichhouse.org http://onestepback.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct,
not tried it." -- Donald Knuth (in a memo to Peter van Emde Boas)

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

--
-- Jim Weirich jim@weirichhouse.org http://onestepback.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct,
not tried it." -- Donald Knuth (in a memo to Peter van Emde Boas)

Oh, heh. I think I looked at this one too early in the morning. :wink:

···

On Apr 7, 2005 7:02 PM, Jim Weirich <jim@weirichhouse.org> wrote:

Oops! I sent this message from the wrong mail account and didn't notice until
now. So here it is again...

---------- Forwarded Message ----------

Subject: Re: 'gem install instiki-0.10.0' does not pull in dependencies - why?
Date: Thursday 07 April 2005 07:32 am
From: Jim Weirich <jweirich@one.net>
To: ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org

On Thursday 07 April 2005 02:20 am, Alexey Verkhovsky wrote:
> I have a problem with this gem (about to be released Instiki 0.10):
> http://alexeyv.textdriven.com/instiki-0.10.0.gem
> It has external dependencies:

[...]

> and yet, when I try to install it, it gets installed without them.

[...]

> E:\>gem install --both --include-dependencies instiki-0.10.0.gem
> Attempting local installation of 'instiki-0.10.0.gem'
> Successfully installed instiki, version 0.10.0

Gems has two installers, a local gems installer and a remote gems installer.
The remote installer will download dependencies, the local installer does
not.

This is the next big item fix on my todo list for RubyGems: the merging of
the two installers into a single installer that can fetch locally or
remotely (from more than one remote source ... another limitation of the
current remote installer).

--

Chad Fowler
http://chadfowler.com

http://rubygems.rubyforge.org (over 100,000 gems served!)

Jim Weirich wrote:

E:\>gem install --both --include-dependencies instiki-0.10.0.gem
   

Gems has two installers, a local gems installer and a remote gems installer.
The remote installer will download dependencies, the local installer does
not.

Oh, I see. When I specify --both, gem looks for the gem file, finds it locally and locks into the local installer, essentially ignoring the --include-dependencies switch, correct?

···

--
Best regards,

Alexey Verkhovsky

Ruby Forum: http://ruby-forum.org (moderator)
RForum: http://rforum.andreas-s.net (co-author)
Instiki: http://instiki.org (maintainer)

Yep. That's basically it.

···

On Thursday 07 April 2005 11:33 pm, Alexey Verkhovsky wrote:

Oh, I see. When I specify --both, gem looks for the gem file, finds it
locally and locks into the local installer, essentially ignoring the
--include-dependencies switch, correct?

--
-- Jim Weirich jim@weirichhouse.org http://onestepback.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct,
not tried it." -- Donald Knuth (in a memo to Peter van Emde Boas)