On Dec 8, 2006, at 08:10 , Grant Hollingworth wrote: > * Eric Hodel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-12-08 01:05]: >> mswin32 has been outrageously successful, but linux and darwin >> less-so. > > Linux and Darwin don't have so many special cases. Or at least > they're far more likely to have a compiler.
But not 100% likely. Tattle will tell us more. >> I think we'll need a DARWIN_INTEL and DARWIN_UNIVERSAL, a more- >> generic linux, and ...? > > Separating architecture and OS might be a good idea. And perhaps a > distinction between source and binary packages? If you're going to make this split you'll need arch, platform and compiler (for win32). And it isn't backwards-compatible with the existing gems. > What does a platform of i586-linux mean, exactly? That it's > compiled already? That it contains assembly that only works on > i586? Special compiler flags? Just "compiled for linux x86". -- Eric Hodel - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://blog.segment7.net I LIT YOUR GEM ON FIRE! _______________________________________________ Rubygems-developers mailing list Rubygems-developers@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
