podspec for binary built version of mailcore2: preserve_paths pattern did not match any file
#959
Comments
|
I will have time tomorrow again to look at issues, so please do keep them coming. In the meantime, please take a look at the In general, you should really stay away from using the |
|
I updated the pod here to match your feedback.
I included the pod in a sample project: And when building, I got the following issues:
It looks like the library has been removed. |
|
Can you upload this sample so I can try it tomorrow? |
|
It's in that repository: https://github.com/MailCore/MC2CocoaPodsSample/tree/mailcore2-binary |
|
Here’s a fixed podspec https://gist.github.com/alloy/f3e0ce3f72fd55cb90ee. As was the case before, you should really try to not use the In addition, using that attribute instead of hardcoding paths in the Using the After specifying the |
|
Ah there is an additional issue when linting, or rather downloading, looking at that now. |
|
Let me know what your findings are. Thanks! |
|
Ok, updated the spec and it passes now: The only issue is that apparently our linter raises a warning when using the |
|
PS the flatten option is necessary, because after unpacking the zip file it contains an extra |
|
I think I tried using the |
|
No, but why not always include the license file in the archive? |
|
That's one way I could also do it. |
|
We kinda want to nudge people to always include a license so that everything’s clear. Legalese is bad enough as it is. |
|
That's a very useful option for spec lint: |
This issue result in the spec not passing the validation for me. |
See |
No, because most people use Ruby specs this is currently an edge case, so it won’t be fixed for the next release which we are trying to get out atm (beta). For now you should use the |
|
Cool. I was looking into |
It didn't go through :( |
|
Sigh. One thing you can do is hot-patch your installation to apply this fix You can find the right file like so: |
|
Applying this fix didn't actually help. |
|
@alloy Any other suggestion? |
|
Here's the output when using 0.35.0.rc2 |
|
0.4.5 has been pushed. |
|
Hi @alloy, Using https://github.com/MailCore/MC2CocoaPodsSample, branch mailcore2-binary It didn't add the following flags to my xcode target: Also, there was nothing related to headers. Therefore, I also had the following build error: |
|
That’s because you did not include the |
|
I included that option. Result of installation: Headers files: The headers are missing. |
|
It works fine for me. The only difference is that I changed the Podfile to use iOS 7.1, because the mailcore2 spec states it isn’t compatible with 6.1. |
|
I don't have the same behavior: Here's the Podfile: Here's the spec for MailCore2: Here's the pod version: Is there anything I'm missing? Is there more information I can provide to investigate why the behavior is not the same? |
Closed
pod 'mailcore2', :path => '~/Cocoapods/mailcore2'What is at that path? Is it a clone of I have created a simpler example that you can test to verify, where I copied the podspec into the MC2CocoaPodsSample dir: Besides some ARC errors in the sample app code, this version builds fine for me. |
|
:path was pointing to the folder with the .podspec file. |
|
Ace! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
https://gist.github.com/dinhviethoa/1714b878d8fe7be7dc99
When I use
pod spec lint, I get the following error:The layout of the zip file is:
If I prefix the pattern with
mailcore2-ios-5, it will go through the lint.Though, when I include
mailcore2in a Podfile, the library and the header files won't show up in the resulting project folder.Is there anything I'm missing?
Thanks!
@alloy
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: