From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <e@80x24.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-ASN:  
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00
	shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0
Received: from localhost (dcvr.yhbt.net [127.0.0.1])
	by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A2A12022A;
	Mon,  7 Nov 2016 20:39:20 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 20:39:20 +0000
From: Eric Wong <e@80x24.org>
To: Olivier FAURAX <olivier.faurax@anyces.com>
Cc: unicorn-public@bogomips.org
Subject: Re: Build error of 5.1.0 due to RString
Message-ID: <20161107203920.GA10287@starla>
References: <5ace6a20-e094-293d-93df-b557480e12d5@anyces.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5ace6a20-e094-293d-93df-b557480e12d5@anyces.com>
List-Id: <unicorn-public@bogomips.org>

Olivier FAURAX <olivier.faurax@anyces.com> wrote:
> It is about a RString that has not some members, so perhaps an API has been
> modified somewhere.

<snip>

> /opt/bitnami/apps/gitlab/htdocs/vendor/bundle/ruby/2.1.0/gems/unicorn-5.1.0/unicorn.gemspec
> Building native extensions.  This could take a while...
> /opt/bitnami/ruby/bin/ruby extconf.rb
> checking for SIZEOF_OFF_T in ruby.h... yes
> checking for SIZEOF_SIZE_T in ruby.h... yes
> checking for SIZEOF_LONG in ruby.h... yes

OK, ruby.h is there, so development headers exist...

> checking for rb_str_set_len() in ruby.h... no
> checking for rb_hash_clear() in ruby.h... no

These last two lines do not look right.  Can you show us your
mkmf.log file?  The output you originally posted is not enough
as it doesn't show the long compiler options and paths used.

Perhaps a library file is missing for static linking,
since these function checks require.

I'm not familiar with bitnami and how it builds/installs
Ruby, so maybe it's missing libruby*static.a or looking
in the wrong place somehow.

<snip> The failing code should've never been compiled
in the first place and should probably be removed.
However, the rb_hash_clear() detection is still necessary...

Thanks for reporting this.  You might want to loop in somebody
familiar with bitnami to poke around, too.