fixed bug #808

[GideonRed-zz]

This is in regards to https://github.com/jordansissel/fpm/issues/808.

Issue https://github.com/jordansissel/fpm/issues/808 showed that the symbolic link behavior has changed. The fix to https://github.com/jordansissel/fpm/issues/658 lead to the behavior change. https://github.com/jordansissel/fpm/issues/658 highlighted that the ruby file handling changed between ruby 1.8.7 to ruby 1.9.3 . Unfortunately when it was fixed to work with the newer ruby 1.9.3 it lead to https://github.com/jordansissel/fpm/issues/808.

This fix should fix https://github.com/jordansissel/fpm/issues/658 and https://github.com/jordansissel/fpm/issues/808 for ruby 1.8.7 and ruby 1.9.3.

[eastein]

Bump! Bug #808 bit me today. I am not able in the situation I am in to use unreleased versions of software without organizational complexity so I am forcing fpm to run in 1.9.3 ruby instead of 1.8.7, which works around this. @jordansissel please take a look at this pull request and if it passes muster with you, merge and release!

For now I am reworking my project to not use symlinks instead of depending on fpm to package them correctly.

[eastein]

Thanks Gideon for describing this issue well. It doesn't seem that running 1.3.3 in ruby 1.9.3 is doing the right thing,

[deadlysyn]

just hit this issue on centos 6.6, ruby 2.1.2p95 via rvm and fpm 1.3.3... had worked around it with a post hack, but this patch seems to make fpm dtrt. thanks!

[jordansissel]

Looks like 319966cc may have fixed this (it's in master, hasn't been released)

[jordansissel]

Can someone confirm if this is still an issue? Did 319966c fix this?

[eastein]

@jordansissel I can try to confirm it next week. This branch looks unmergable right now "This branch has conflicts that must be resolved" though... would prefer to test after any potential merge conflicts are fixed.

[GideonRed-zz]

I'll have a look tonight.

On Mon, 23 Nov 2015 at 15:32 Eric Stein [email protected] wrote:

@jordansissel https://github.com/jordansissel I can try to confirm it next week. This branch looks unmergable right now "This branch has conflicts that must be resolved" though... would prefer to test after any potential merge conflicts are fixed.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/jordansissel/fpm/pull/823#issuecomment-159103744.

[eastein]

Thanks Gideon

[GideonRed-zz]

Tried reproducing this tonight with three different ruby versions but all are giving me:

[gideon@localhost fpm]$  ./bin/fpm -s dir -t deb -n example -v 1 /tmp/example
/home/gideon/.rvm/gems/ruby-2.2.3/gems/clamp-1.0.0/lib/clamp/attribute/instance.rb:16:in `instance_variable_defined?': `@deb_[no_]auto_config_files' is not allowed as an instance variable name (NameError)
    from /home/gideon/.rvm/gems/ruby-2.2.3/gems/clamp-1.0.0/lib/clamp/attribute/instance.rb:16:in `defined?'
    from /home/gideon/.rvm/gems/ruby-2.2.3/gems/clamp-1.0.0/lib/clamp/attribute/instance.rb:64:in `default_from_environment'
    from /home/gideon/.rvm/gems/ruby-2.2.3/gems/clamp-1.0.0/lib/clamp/option/parsing.rb:41:in `block in parse_options'
    from /home/gideon/.rvm/gems/ruby-2.2.3/gems/clamp-1.0.0/lib/clamp/option/parsing.rb:40:in `each'
    from /home/gideon/.rvm/gems/ruby-2.2.3/gems/clamp-1.0.0/lib/clamp/option/parsing.rb:40:in `parse_options'
    from /home/gideon/.rvm/gems/ruby-2.2.3/gems/clamp-1.0.0/lib/clamp/command.rb:53:in `parse'
    from /home/gideon/.rvm/gems/ruby-2.2.3/gems/clamp-1.0.0/lib/clamp/command.rb:67:in `run'
    from /home/gideon/jordansissel/fpm/lib/fpm/command.rb:555:in `run'
    from /home/gideon/.rvm/gems/ruby-2.2.3/gems/clamp-1.0.0/lib/clamp/command.rb:133:in `run'
    from ./bin/fpm:8:in `<main>'

I'll debug later why clamp is not working for me.

[GideonRed-zz]

This is the line that's breaking for me: https://github.com/jordansissel/fpm/blob/master/lib/fpm/package/deb.rb#L131

I don't even have to pass any arguments to fpm to reproduce this bug, just running binary with --help will cause this.

[jordansissel]

Yeah this is my bad I think I broke that. I'll fix it shortly. <3 for your efforts.

[josephholsten]

@jordansissel did this get fixed? should I rebase?