You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
All versions of base64 use String#unpack1, introduced in Ruby 2.4.
In #17, the gemspec was updated to declare Ruby >= 2.4 as a dependency, but this change was only published in base64 v0.2.0. As a result, v0.1.0 and v0.1.1 are still published as being compatible with Ruby 2.3, despite causing base64 decoding to fail when run in a Ruby 2.3 app.
To remedy this, would it be possible to do either of the following:
Yank v0.1.0 and v0.1.1, since they have incorrect dependencies declared, and publish new versions v0.1.0.1 and v0.1.1.1 with correctly declared Ruby >= 2.4
Publish a Ruby 2.3-compatible version v0.1.2 that doesn't rely on String#unpack1
If the second option would be preferable, I can put up a PR.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
kolatat
added a commit
to kolatat/base64
that referenced
this issue
Sep 17, 2024
All versions of base64 use
String#unpack1
, introduced in Ruby 2.4.In #17, the gemspec was updated to declare Ruby
>= 2.4
as a dependency, but this change was only published in base64 v0.2.0. As a result, v0.1.0 and v0.1.1 are still published as being compatible with Ruby 2.3, despite causing base64 decoding to fail when run in a Ruby 2.3 app.To remedy this, would it be possible to do either of the following:
String#unpack1
If the second option would be preferable, I can put up a PR.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: