Issue #10213 has been updated by Hans Mackowiak.


a "Gem::Specification#bundled_gem?" would have been the same use case as a "Gem::Specification#default_gem?" i think ... hm currently you can remove bundled gems with "gem uninstall", i dont know if that is such a good idea because it might break something ... (thats why default gems are potected)

my use case would be i writing a script that makes a dot graph from the installed/requested gems and the dependencies between them ... with this some gems are different styled depending on some conditions, like if they have older versions that can be safe-removed(cleanup) or if there are newer versions online that can be updated, or if that gem is a default gem 

----------------------------------------
Bug #10213: bundled gems ignored by make install
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/10213#change-48726

* Author: Hans Mackowiak
* Status: Assigned
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: Hiroshi SHIBATA
* Category: build
* Target version: 
* ruby -v: ruby 2.2.0dev (2014-09-08 trunk 47447) [x86_64-linux]
* Backport: 2.0.0: UNKNOWN, 2.1: UNKNOWN
----------------------------------------
i am often working with ruby trunk, and then i notice that 
"sudo make install" does ignore the gems that got moved from
"defs/default_gems" to "gems/bundled_gems"

means gems listed in "gems/bundled_gems" toally got ignored and might missing later



-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/