Tests fails when running under 1.9 and system Ruby is 1.8 (and vice-versa)

Details

  • Type: Bug Bug
  • Status: Open Open
  • Priority: Unknown Unknown
  • Resolution: Unresolved
  • Affects Version/s: 0.6.12
  • Fix Version/s: None
  • Component/s: Integration Testing
  • Labels:
    None
  • Environment:

    Debian GNU/Linux sid/unstable as of February 10th, 2012

Description

the ruby plugin tests get their test data from the currently running Ruby VM, but the plugin actually obtains the data by running `ruby`. This causes the tests to fail when the system Ruby and the currently running Ruby are different.

Please see https://github.com/opscode/ohai/pull/58#issuecomment-3898071

https://github.com/opscode/ohai/pull/58

Activity

Ascending order - Click to sort in descending order
Hide
Permalink
Bryan McLellan [Opscode] added a comment -

Your commit to 'bin/ohai' is a revert of OHAI-140.

See https://github.com/mdkent/ohai/commit/0062e57059d91630c83e79e28341fc088932e3d4

At the time, it was decided to include OHAI-140 so you could run 'bin/ohai' from the source tree. I'm unconvinced that was really a feature we desired, particularly since 'ruby -rubygems bin/ohai' works just as well and running from source isn't that common.

As someone who has used other package management systems than Rubygems for maintaining Ruby libraries, I still believe we should not force the user to have Rubygems install on principle, even though most likely will except the extremes.

http://yehudakatz.com/2009/07/24/rubygems-good-practice/
http://tomayko.com/writings/require-rubygems-antipattern

Dan originally merged OHAI-140, so I'll ask him if he recalls that discussion.

Show
Bryan McLellan [Opscode] added a comment - Your commit to 'bin/ohai' is a revert of OHAI-140 . See https://github.com/mdkent/ohai/commit/0062e57059d91630c83e79e28341fc088932e3d4 At the time, it was decided to include OHAI-140 so you could run 'bin/ohai' from the source tree. I'm unconvinced that was really a feature we desired, particularly since 'ruby -rubygems bin/ohai' works just as well and running from source isn't that common. As someone who has used other package management systems than Rubygems for maintaining Ruby libraries, I still believe we should not force the user to have Rubygems install on principle, even though most likely will except the extremes. http://yehudakatz.com/2009/07/24/rubygems-good-practice/ http://tomayko.com/writings/require-rubygems-antipattern Dan originally merged OHAI-140 , so I'll ask him if he recalls that discussion.
Hide
Permalink
Antonio Terceiro added a comment -

Yeah, and the -rubygems option is actually only needed for Ruby 1.8 ...

Show
Antonio Terceiro added a comment - Yeah, and the -rubygems option is actually only needed for Ruby 1.8 ...
Hide
Permalink
Steven Danna added a comment -

This was reviewed during this week's triage meeting and we are hesitant to revert OHAI-140 until we better understand what the current breakage is and why reverting OHAI-140 is the best way to fix it.

Show
Steven Danna added a comment - This was reviewed during this week's triage meeting and we are hesitant to revert OHAI-140 until we better understand what the current breakage is and why reverting OHAI-140 is the best way to fix it.
Hide
Permalink
Antonio Terceiro added a comment - - edited

ok, I see your point. Is it possible to merge only b2b8304 then, and ignore the other commit that reverts OHAI-140?

Show
Antonio Terceiro added a comment - - edited ok, I see your point. Is it possible to merge only b2b8304 then, and ignore the other commit that reverts OHAI-140 ?

People

  • Assignee:
    Unassigned
    Reporter:
    Antonio Terceiro
Vote (0)
Watch (0)

Dates

  • Created:
    Updated: