Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 2 Jun 2012 00:59:58 -0400
From:      Steve Wills <swills@freebsd.org>
To:        Stanislav Sedov <stas@freebsd.org>
Cc:        ports@freebsd.org, ruby@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Ruby 1.9 as default
Message-ID:  <05EF24D9-8D8E-4A50-9F33-8580656AD402@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <20120601193059.af9201da.stas@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <4FC96D45.8080904@FreeBSD.org> <20120601193059.af9201da.stas@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jun 1, 2012, at 10:30 PM, Stanislav Sedov wrote:

> On Fri, 01 Jun 2012 21:32:53 -0400
> Steve Wills <swills@FreeBSD.org> mentioned:
>=20
>> Hi All,
>>=20
>> I think we should try to make Ruby 1.9 the default Ruby again and =
would
>> like to see it done before 9.1 is released. I've submitted a patch =
which
>> does this and requested and exp-run from portmgr.
>>=20
>> I would like to get feedback on this idea. If you have experience =
with
>> Ruby 1.9 as default, good or bad, please speak up. You can test this =
by
>> setting RUBY_DEFAULT_VER=3D1.9 in /etc/make.conf or editing =
Mk/bsd.ruby.mk
>> and setting the same variable there.
>>=20
>=20
> I'm not sure it's a good idea.
> Ruby 1.9 still has some nasty bugs on FreeBSD, related to the threads =
and
> fork.  That is fork in ruby 1.9 hangs sometimes...

Could you give me some more info on this? If I can reproduce it perhaps =
I can track it down and solve it.

> OTOH, I've been running ruby 1.9 as default on both of my desktops and =
have
> not seen major problems except this one.  Still, it'd be nice for =
someone
> to fix it first (I remember there were a lot of eager commiters at the =
time
> I gave up my commit bit).
>=20
> The main question is whether the switch to 1.9 will be beneficial for =
our
> users.  Apart from some libraries targeting 1.9 exclusivly now, most =
of of
> them still work with 1.8 and there're still some that work with 1.8 =
only.
> Given that most of the ports users mostly care for 3rd party =
applications
> to work, I'm not sure if the switch to 1.9 will be a win for them...


Isn't 1.9 a bit faster than 1.8? And 1.8 doesn't build with clang while =
1.9 does, so we'll at least want to switch it before 10.0 comes out, =
IMHO. Also, 1.9 has been the default version from ruby-lang.org for a =
long time and the community is making good progress towards moving to =
1.9 over all. I think most things work with 1.9 now, but I could be =
wrong. Are there specific apps that you are thinking of that don't work =
with 1.9? 1.9 definitely seems to pass all the tests that 1.8 passes and =
more.

As far as what users of ports want, the point of this mail was to get =
them to speak up and voice their opinions. :)

BTW, do you use 1.8 or 1.9? Actually, I'm betting you use Rubinius now =
that I think about it, no?

Steve




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?05EF24D9-8D8E-4A50-9F33-8580656AD402>