undefined method `exists?' for nil:NilClass when specifying git repo

[itszero]

Report

• What did you do?

I add ShareKit as my dependency and specify its git repo for using latest revision.
If I remove the ShareKit line, everything is fine. If I don't specify the repo URL, it works.
and finally, if I change the Podspec file to make it use the latest commit, it works as well.

• What did you expect to happen?

The latest version on the master branch of given repo of ShareKit being included.

• What happened instead?

Error.

Stack

   CocoaPods : 0.6.0.rc2
        Ruby : ruby 1.9.3p125 (2012-02-16 revision 34643) [x86_64-darwin11.3.0]
    RubyGems : 1.8.21
        Host : Mac OS X 10.7.4 (11E53)
       Xcode : 4.3.3 (4E3002)
Ruby lib dir : /Users/Zero/.rvm/rubies/ruby-1.9.3-p125/lib
Repositories : master - git://github.com/CocoaPods/Specs.git @ b271221cd87f60b509f02b3fc8b7f5b5a3c8d529

Podfile

platform :ios

dependency 'DTCoreText'
dependency 'AFNetworking'
dependency 'BlockAlertsAnd-ActionSheets'
dependency 'BlocksKit'
dependency 'EGOTableViewPullRefresh'
dependency 'JSONKit'
dependency 'Objective-C-HMTL-Parser'
dependency 'QuickDialog'
dependency 'SVProgressHUD'

dependency 'ShareKit', :git => 'https://github.com/ShareKit/ShareKit.git'

Error

undefined method `exists?' for nil:NilClass
/Users/Zero/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125/bundler/gems/CocoaPods-fd5c7045e3b6/lib/cocoapods/dependency.rb:140:in `specification_from_sandbox'
/Users/Zero/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125/bundler/gems/CocoaPods-fd5c7045e3b6/lib/cocoapods/resolver.rb:44:in `find_cached_set'
/Users/Zero/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125/bundler/gems/CocoaPods-fd5c7045e3b6/lib/cocoapods/resolver.rb:60:in `block in find_dependency_specs'
/Users/Zero/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125/bundler/gems/CocoaPods-fd5c7045e3b6/lib/cocoapods/resolver.rb:58:in `each'
/Users/Zero/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125/bundler/gems/CocoaPods-fd5c7045e3b6/lib/cocoapods/resolver.rb:58:in `find_dependency_specs'
/Users/Zero/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125/bundler/gems/CocoaPods-fd5c7045e3b6/lib/cocoapods/resolver.rb:25:in `block in resolve'
/Users/Zero/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125/bundler/gems/CocoaPods-fd5c7045e3b6/lib/cocoapods/resolver.rb:22:in `each'
/Users/Zero/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125/bundler/gems/CocoaPods-fd5c7045e3b6/lib/cocoapods/resolver.rb:22:in `resolve'
/Users/Zero/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125/bundler/gems/CocoaPods-fd5c7045e3b6/lib/cocoapods/installer.rb:172:in `specs_by_target'
/Users/Zero/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125/bundler/gems/CocoaPods-fd5c7045e3b6/lib/cocoapods/installer.rb:81:in `install!'
/Users/Zero/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125/bundler/gems/CocoaPods-fd5c7045e3b6/lib/cocoapods/command/install.rb:53:in `run'
/Users/Zero/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125/bundler/gems/CocoaPods-fd5c7045e3b6/lib/cocoapods/command.rb:69:in `run'
/Users/Zero/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125/bundler/gems/CocoaPods-fd5c7045e3b6/bin/pod:12:in `<top (required)>'
/Users/Zero/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125/bin/pod:19:in `load'
/Users/Zero/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125/bin/pod:19:in `<main>'

[fabiopelosin]

The syntax that you used is reserved for repos that have a podspec in the root. You can use one of the options available in the wiki to use the head version of sharekit ShareKit.

[itszero]

Ah, right! Thanks for pointing out the overlooked point.

[subdigital]

@irrationalfab instead of closing this ticket, I think a better error message is in order in this case. Something like:

No pod spec found in the root of "http://github.com/ShareKit/ShareKit.git". You'll need to specify a custom pod spec path with the :podspec option.

What do you think?

[fabiopelosin]

@subdigital I totally agree about the error message. Yet to keep things tidy in this cases I prefer to create a new ticket that describes the change and reference the original issue.

Btw, do you have any opinions about #336?

[subdigital]

Cool, I'll submit a pull request shortly...

On Jun 14, 2012, at 11:56 AM, Fabio Pelosin wrote:

@subdigital I totally agree about the error message. Yet to keep things tidy in this cases I prefer to create a new ticket that describes the change and reference the original issue.

Btw, do you have any opinions about #336?

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#335 (comment)

[fabiopelosin]

Nice!