Open varac opened 2 years ago
I simply put a new line in the file Gemfile
:
gem "webrick"
Then it works.
I ran into this issue as well with latest. @shinyzhu can you explain more your workaround? Which Gemfile? As of now I don't have a gemfile as I wanted to just use the docker container w/o having to install ruby etc. One work-around is to pin to 4.2.0 instead.
I simply put a new line in the file
Gemfile
:
gem "webrick"
Then it works.
Thanks for the hint to this workaround. That's how I solved it as well, as temporary fix. However, I still would prefer having webrick installed as default to reduce startup container times.
I could fix it adding the webrick and other dependencies, see code below:
RUN bundle init
RUN touch Gemfile.lock
RUN chmod a+w Gemfile.lock
RUN chmod 777 Gemfile
RUN bundle add webrick
RUN bundle add rouge
RUN bundle jekyll-watch
A few notes:
jekyll/jekyll
, so it was needed to initialize the bundleMaybe you folks don't need to add all those commands, but in case you faced with those issues, you can try out it
This project has been published broken for 4 months. Could be time to fork and/or move on.
@envygeeks Do you need someone to help you release this image? This is something I use and would be willing to put in some hours towards.
~I've a working version with docker compose now.~
Actually i've given up hope and transfered to https://github.com/BretFisher/jekyll-serve - which works out of the box and (seems) to be more actively maintained.
Cheers!
I noticed that new build for my website started failing suddenly with a
cannot load such file -- webrick (LoadError)
. I pulled the latestjekyll/jekyll:4.2.2
image and can reproduce the issue:Before I pulled the latest
jekyll/jekyll:4.2.2
image today I tried the one I had from earlier and that one inlcuded webrick as it should.I noticed that the jekyll/jekyll:4.2.2 image got updated 3 days ago (April 10, 6:13am) so I wonder if this was the time where an image without webrick was pushed ? Is this related to the Update to ruby:3.1.1-alpine3.15 commit?
I'm super happy so far with the image, but I would propose not to update existing image tag and rather use a different tag for updates in order to avoid such regressions.