Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 16:16:18 -0700 From: Stanislav Sedov <stas@FreeBSD.org> To: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> Cc: stas@freebsd.org, Paul Hoffman <phoffman@proper.com>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Installing Ruby suggestion Message-ID: <20100820161618.63b0c5bd.stas@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=mOns8ng%2Bj6hB2sNy06V6cbzrajK2WkKP63QQg@mail.gmail.com> References: <p06240846c8932840d791@10.20.30.158> <AANLkTi=mOns8ng%2Bj6hB2sNy06V6cbzrajK2WkKP63QQg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Signature=_Fri__20_Aug_2010_16_16_18_-0700_7U5DncR2Ev0fxCUg Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 18:55:33 -0400 Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> mentioned: > On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Paul Hoffman <phoffman@proper.com> wrote: > > Greetings again. When doing a "make install", it takes *forever* in the= "Generating RDoc documentation" step. This isn't a big deal the first time= , but when updating Ruby (such as for the recent security announcement), yo= u need to do a "make deinstall" before you do a "make reinstall". Having th= at second step take a long time means that there is a longer time that ther= e is no Ruby on the system. > > > > Could the RDoc step be done during "make" instead of "make install"? > > >=20 > Generally its best to CC the maintainer as well. In this case the > maintainer is stas@freebsd.org >=20 > That being said: I second this request ;) >=20 Ruby install systems works this way. I'm not sure I can do anything about = this. You may try asking on the ruby mailing list although. If you concerned about rdoc, you can disable them via OPTIONS. The time wh= en there're no ruby in the system is probably critical for production environments, whe= re rdoc is not required. Another option is to use packages, although I unders= tand it usually takes a bit of time for official packages to appear (but that's a d= ifferent story); but you can build the updated package on a separate machine and the= n distribute it over critical servers. Nonetheless, I'll try to look on what I can do. But I can't promise anythi= ng, because this is really something that should be done on ruby side. --=20 Stanislav Sedov ST4096-RIPE --Signature=_Fri__20_Aug_2010_16_16_18_-0700_7U5DncR2Ev0fxCUg Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJMbwzIAAoJEL8lojEJL9nwC7sQAIi8rtBgD2Q49NK2JovFP9ms LfXsbP+a9hOFURMgtTG6Wf1FaAgmPDji0VOfeltxEvNlpk9xDrqpZKuf/oCGQPDb QxlNYlv5rMD6aT952Hx9oMskVob+emwaZ9+dhWGIcksHIWY9MWvW3lopjXBcKkls itx/8aTGP3PWQ9dyP4K9XBYe+CxK49Nkn/Md+qE0s7+HRswGlzR106xzAhK5cbqM xsst74dGvE+qj/Do/4+qBn/6DMmu/Xq1tSv3L3CAw3CVl3TbWFgDDrBHVDzXXyuu 8hWUTgQij2W+viN/9cEHx6fU82YoMhndRAThq5QjwSBWP4s3PsIyMM0pYA5XSOyc TZINIpinJW17/MiGS3NbVM6tigxJrBrPVpNBs62eak+wtOe7K0T+YSrK7za99THr Ur5vC4ERKc9RrvdNHgJTkShOOflKK9JMg4P67Q+3J+Sm/w06yJ5WBbrCSowYXHTI 40J8gGOMmM9VFvBiNJ8TOe4OLp5LQSIaMr8BoTaXFoRsVNoaQiu6sE0gj8TvXhEN ah7lyMLq3QgSqpztkkWS96pbtUtHlyLTsaVvDOVCDefHu/YocpIjV63MocFLsgmd zlniqA5molHbQesuZKNcbnBOmq2DgngJyNaeK/NU1jVcNOXRbP1odN7WJEJhcvEw NElLks2MRqLl7xX0LzpD =73iR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Signature=_Fri__20_Aug_2010_16_16_18_-0700_7U5DncR2Ev0fxCUg--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100820161618.63b0c5bd.stas>