Improve error reporting for checksums, raises a new error class.
Solve for multi-source checksum errors.
Add CHECKSUMS to tool/bundler/(dev|standard|rubocop)26_gems.rb
26ceee0e76
Co-authored-by: Samuel Giddins <segiddins@segiddins.me>
This gets the specs passing, and handles the fact that we expect
checkums to be pinned only to a particular source
This also avoids reading in .gem files during lockfile generation,
instead allowing us to query the source for each resolved gem to grab
the checksum
Finally, this opens up a route to having user-stored checksum databases,
similar to how other package managers do this!
Add checksums to dev lockfiles
Handle full name conflicts from different original_platforms when adding checksums to store from compact index
Specs passing on Bundler 3
86c7084e1c
1. Use the checksum provided by the server if provided: provides security
knowing if the gem you downloaded matches the gem on the server
2. Calculate the checksum from the gem on disk: provides security knowing
if the gem has changed between installs
3. In some cases, neither is possible in which case we don't put anything
in the checksum and we maintain functionality as it is today
Add the checksums to specs in the index if we already have them
Prior to checksums, we didn't lose any information when overwriting specs
in the index with stubs. But now when we overwrite EndpointSpecifications
or RemoteSpecifications with more generic specs, we could lose checksum
info. This manually sets checksum info so we keep it in the index.
de00a4f153
We lock the checksum for each resolved spec under a new CHECKSUMS
section in the lockfile.
If the locked spec does not resolve for the local platform, we preserve
the locked checksum, similar to how we preserve specs.
Checksum locking only makes sense on install. The compact index
information is only available then.
bde37ca6bf
The `lock` command is specifically designed to manage the lockfile, so
running it should take precedence over any "frozen" setting.
Besides that, "frozen" is not specifically designed as "lockfile cannot
be updated" but as "installation of gems should be prevented if gemfile
is not in sync with the lockfile".
The lock command does not install any gems and preserves the property of
the lockfile being in sycn with its gemfile, so I think frozen should
not influence it.
The current behavior is quite confusing when frozen is set. On an app
where rubocop can get lockfile updates
```
$ bundle lock --update rubocop
Writing lockfile to /path/to/Gemfile.lock
```
Completely silent, it makes you think that it has written the lockfile,
but still no updates.
In verbose mode, it gives a bit more information, but still confusing
and unexpected, and does not change the lockfile:
```
$ bundle lock --update rubocop --verbose
Running `bundle lock --update "rubocop" --verbose` with bundler 2.4.20
Frozen, using resolution from the lockfile
Writing lockfile to /path/to/Gemfile.lock
```
With this commit, it updates the lockfile as expected.
1d501ae8ea
When the latest allowed minor of `dep` adds a new dependency, that new
dependency would be incorrectly resolved to the latest minor of the
first major version.
fd50c9d4f3
This error message is also printed when using `bundler/setup` in frozen
model, so we're not necessarily installing any gems when it happens.
This new message play nicer with all situations.
6874bbacce
Similarly to how the other ignored files are intended for local
development and not for production, the Gemfile and Gemfile.lock files
for a gem only relate to local development and aren't useful to people
installing the gem.
59049c04be
While working on locking multiple platforms by default, I got an
infinite resolution loop in one of our resolver specs.
The culprit ended up being that when dealing with lockfile specs with
incomplete dependencies (spec appears in lockfile, but its dependencies
don't), those specs were not being properly expired and that tripped up
resolution.
The issue for some reason only manifests when dealing with multiple
lockfile platforms, that's why it only manifested when working on
locking multiple platforms by default.
4ca72913bb
Bundler is very conservative by default, trying to preserve versions
from the lockfile as possible, and never downgrading them. However, when
it runs into a resolution error, it still tries to find a valid
resolution.
This fallback behavior was too "brute-force" though, completely
unrestricting any gem found in the resolution conflict, and that could
lead to direct dependencies being downgraded in some edge cases.
Instead, unlock things a bit more carefully:
* First try unlocking fully pinned indirect dependencies, but leave a
lower bound requirement in place to prevent downgrades.
* Then try unlocking any fully pinned dependency, also leaving a lower
bound requirement in place.
* Finally completely unrestrict dependencies if nothing else worked.
7f55ed8302
Since Bundler 2.4, we will try to checkout any branch specified in the
Gemfile, while until Bundler 2.3 we would directly checkout the locked
revision.
This should not make any difference in most situations, but in some edge
cases, like if the branch specified in the `Gemfile` has been renamed,
but the locked revision still exist, it causes an error now while before
it would update the lockfile without issues.
I debated which behavior was best, since I was not sure. But my
conclusion is that if the situation does not require expiring the
lockfile source in favor of the Gemfile source, we should use the locked
revision directly and proceed happily. So I restored Bundler 2.3
behavior.
I think this is consistent with how yanked gems are handled, for example.
Of course, if explicitly updating the git source itself, or all gems, we
will still get any errors like missing branches related to the git source.
This was working fine for direct dependencies using
`force_ruby_platform` explicitly through Gemfile, but not for indirect
dependencies. In general, indirect dependencies do not have this
property set, but in truffleruby this is different and the default value
is to have it set.
This should be a very rare edge case, however, it does happen when using
a .dev version of Bundler because in that case, that's the only version
that the resolver considers, and it should not be ignored.
We could've special cased this specifically for Bundler, but I think it
does make sense for every gem.
If the original `BUNDLE_GEMFILE` is different from the default, then the
suggestion wouldn't work as is.
Before:
```
$ util/rubocop
Could not find rubocop-1.30.1 in locally installed gems
Run `bundle install` to install missing gems.
$ rubygems git:(better-cmd-suggestion) ✗ bundle install
Could not locate Gemfile
```
After:
```
$ util/rubocop
Could not find rubocop-1.30.1 in locally installed gems
Run `bundle install --gemfile /path/to/rubygems/bundler/tool/bundler/lint_gems.rb` to install missing gems.
$ bundle install --gemfile /path/to/rubygems/bundler/tool/bundler/lint_gems.rb
Fetching gem metadata from https://rubygems.org/.........
Using ast 2.4.2
Using bundler 2.4.7
Using parser 3.1.2.0
Using rainbow 3.1.1
Using parallel 1.22.1
Using regexp_parser 2.5.0
Using rubocop-ast 1.18.0
Using rexml 3.2.5
Using ruby-progressbar 1.11.0
Using unicode-display_width 2.1.0
Fetching rubocop 1.30.1
Installing rubocop 1.30.1
Using rubocop-performance 1.14.2
Bundle complete! 2 Gemfile dependencies, 12 gems now installed.
Use `bundle info [gemname]` to see where a bundled gem is installed.
$ util/rubocop
Inspecting 345 files
.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
345 files inspected, no offenses detected
```
bf1320d805
* Replaces the wording of "is forbidden" with "cannot be used"
* Fixes the method signature of VersionRange::Empty#eql?
8c6b3f130b
Co-authored-by: Daniel Colson <danieljamescolson@gmail.com>
The previous code loads bundler's gemspec which does not include the generated
gemspec file, and thus the test was passing where it should indeed fail.
With this change, the test properly fails now.
2098ea0d75
Prior to this commit `bundle binstubs --standalone --all` would output a
warning about not being able to generate a standalone binstub for
bundler.
This warning predates the `--all` option, and I don't think it makes
sense in this context. The warning makes good sense when explicitly
trying to generate a bundler standalone binstub with `bundle binstubs
bundler --standalone`, since that command won't do what the user might
have expected. But `--all` is not specifically asking for bundler, and
having it report each time that the bundler binstubs could not be
generated does not seem particularly helpful. The only way to make that
warning go away would be to stop using `--standalone --all`.
This commit skips the warning when running with the `--all` option.
e6a72e19eb
