Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 15 Nov 2012 15:59:36 -0800
From:      Stanislav Sedov <stas@freebsd.org>
To:        Paul Schmehl <pschmehl_lists@tx.rr.com>
Cc:        FreeBSD Ruby List <freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: More problems than I care to think about
Message-ID:  <138C62E5-F2ED-439F-AFA8-777A48B2A87B@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <76BB3E3F07A4F68477B30C11@utd71538.campus.ad.utdallas.edu>
References:  <76BB3E3F07A4F68477B30C11@utd71538.campus.ad.utdallas.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Nov 15, 2012, at 11:03 AM, Paul Schmehl <pschmehl_lists@tx.rr.com> =
wrote:

> I've been trying to port Snorby to FreeBSD.  Emphasis on trying.  I =
run into problems at every turn, and some seem unresolvable.  Snorby =
requires ruby 1.9.2 or better.  The default version on FreeBSD is 1.8.  =
Putting RUBY_DEFAULT_VER=3D1.9 in /etc/make.conf breaks some of the =
rubygem ports that will only build on 1.8.
>=20
> sysutils/rubygem-bundler was giving me fits.  I discovered that while =
the port version is 1.1.5, the current version, which fixes the problems =
I was having, is 1.2.2.  I created a port update for that and was going =
to submit it, but then I discovered devel/rubygem-eventmachine "blows =
up" with a core dump if built with 1.9.
>=20
> This is beyond discouraging and has caused me to abandon the project =
entirely.
>=20
> It seems that we need a massive effort to update ruby and rails and =
all gems to the latest versions.  Who is responsible for that?  How can =
we get that done?
>=20

All the ruby ports are already at the latest version and we do generally =
a very
good job to keep them updated (and we backport fixes and patches =
regularly).
Rubygems a lot more complicated as there're a lot of messy dependencies =
between
them and a lot of times you cannot just update something because a lot =
of other
stuff that depend on a particular version will break as a result.  =
That's why my
recommendation always was to try to keep all gems out of the ports tree =
unless
absolutely necessary.  Frankly, it does not make much sense at all to =
put gems
into ports, as gems, unlike ports, support multiple versions being =
installed, and
a lot of ruby software depend on that feature.

I don't know what kind of problem you're experiencing with event =
machine, but I
guess it is not ruby related.  It'd be helpful if you can post more =
info.  I use
eventmachine both from ports and gems for several production application =
with
ruby 1.9 and have not seen any segfaults (except the one that was housed =
by my
own C extension library).=20

--
ST4096-RIPE






Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?138C62E5-F2ED-439F-AFA8-777A48B2A87B>