Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 18:07:42 -0400 From: Steve Wills <steve@mouf.net> To: Eric <freebsdlists-ruby@chillibear.com> Cc: ruby@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ruby 1.9 update patch Message-ID: <4DF538AE.90204@mouf.net> In-Reply-To: <CA02BECD.1F23C%freebsdlists-ruby@chillibear.com> References: <CA02BECD.1F23C%freebsdlists-ruby@chillibear.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 05/25/11 09:12, Eric wrote: >> From: Steve Wills <steve@mouf.net> >> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Thanks for the feedback! >> >> I was attempting to do some run time testing of this and stumbled upon a >> strange issue. It seems that even without my patch (and with it too), if >> you do this: >> >> cd /usr/ports/databases/ruby-bdb >> env RUBY_VER=1.9 make install >> >> on a system without any ruby, it will install Ruby 1.9, then fail to >> install the databases/ruby-bdb port since there will not be a "rdoc" >> binary installed, but only "rdoc19". My patch doesn't make this worse, >> but it doesn't help it either. Should I try to solve this and if so how? >> >> Steve > > That cropped up before here: > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ruby/2011-March/001169.html > > I half remember you get a rake19 command, etc when installing Ruby 1.9. You > certainly get a ruby18 in /usr/local/bin for 1.8! Anyhow in the 1.9 Ruby > Makefile you can see a small snippet of code which currently doesn't do > anything, but would symlink those xxx19 scripts to the correct names if the > default version was bumped. > > .if ${RUBY_VER} == ${RUBY_DEFAULT_VER} > . for FILE in ${INSTALLED_SCRIPTS} > ${LN} -f ${PREFIX}/bin/${FILE}${RUBY_SUFFIX} ${PREFIX}/bin/${FILE} > . endfor > .endif > > INSTALLED_SCRIPTS being: irb erb rdoc ri ruby testrb rake gem > > How that symlinking affects or interferes with some of the gem versions of > those I don't know. > > I suppose we need to decide if the plan is to get the system so that a user > could almost choose Ruby 1.8 or 1.9 as a default (Makefile option to do > things like those symlinks?) or if we're getting it so that we can just flip > the switch (RUBY_DEFAULT_VER) and make 1.9 a default in a future release. > That said we'd want to make sure it was fairly trivial for a user to revert > to a 1.8 install since it's still a popular version. I think we're going to have to first do the first option you mentioned, do a bunch of testing, then we should be able to just flip the switch. Reverting back to the older version should just be a matter of setting RUBY_VER = 1.8. > Also I do keep meaning to test your 1.9 patch and try it out when I get some > time! Promise! Please see my other posting for an updated patch. :) Thanks, Steve -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (FreeBSD) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJN9TiuAAoJEPXPYrMgexuhX64H+gNL0jXnDOZ+rPM8hf7hqbLa uqYHnlHp5k0SLHhYBVot7j+gRg+wcqE1mSqGQD7YO+aRUmEtww71OsF7CLm6GSRs U4ftRpL33HvhVt7HTfWgsi3BRaRw4T2RTi64YeiEQtTk6g4MuRj31rXmANMv21kZ tsMQg/32ZnfrVR7woDshpcjMGyWwxmfRJS32Rw0O8imBMuR+i2NFiOyAsUm4cocn g4k9vOKnY6pDvlZ4iayumgT10tEDe/rMGb2gKzgUmU/Ycea9cpy+vG44M4fQByJM A+IYV2BfBHifpxz7njrWF7WK/Jn8Y9mJUn44S8XVFzhnnCFi3zrA/FFP3GSiLfU= =WkNi -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4DF538AE.90204>