-----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 On 05/19/11 16:56, Philip M. Gollucci wrote: > On 05/19/11 02:02, Steve Wills wrote: > The diff, and suggested progression seem rational and right to me. I've > only read the diff though, not tried it. > >> gems and rake from ports for Ruby 1.9, just like we do for 1.8. This is >> needed because some gems need the newer gems and rake. >> >> - From there, making Ruby 1.9 default will be as simple as >> finding/fixing/marking the rest of the things that don't work with it, >> then flipping the default in bsd.ruby.mk. >> >> Any comments would be appreciated! >> >> Thanks, >> Steve -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (FreeBSD) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJN3O3tAAoJEPXPYrMgexuhsFwIAKUd5HguUoNLG7hjE34YgvQ2 nlKirRYofGFDLy/dEqo5DQkhG5NmrK3yZ7DueZN/Ykcd0HZnVwVS+gR+n9++Cvt5 uVw8MuA8B8/Ye/of/eTvj8jIcPZ5AUwMfjCE2qWYlrnj+6yxTX4JTf+8yz7bGi67 guv2W+1zSQw8Q1NRFaydqUi2Sw3DqDGgvT+sZGgLmTsOBFEpG3QTo3t6ZGbwv7uY zm3hypQv7NuC7twkbwTh5mgP6ro9S24Un47pa9Dy1BCJcsO3aBImApQ7lR6exwRC IP5dC+FMIvb37neqlMug663a2NpF5fq3SOBxHE4/BkB6imT/FNamIZQlmXe30T8= =/5wl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ruby To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
