On 3/22/07, Patrick Hurley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/22/07, TRANS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 3/21/07, Nic Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I'll bite. > > > > > > One popular bundle people might relate to is to bundle the rails gems > > > together, as a demonstration. > > > > > > BTW, does/will your solution work for gems with components that get > > > compiled > > > at installation time? Probably not a showstopper though,. Gembundle still > > > seems a good idea. > > > > I don't see why not. It installs gems just like gems are currently > > installed, this just adds a layer for packaging packages --hence a > > literal multi-package. > > But they are built on the target system correct? I am actually (when I > can find spare minutes) working on a binary builder, that will take a > built from source binary gem from one system and create a new binary > gem for that architecture. It is not elegant (I package up > intermediate object files and the like), but in general I believe it > will work. This is to simplify the use of gems with extensions on > production servers that do not generally have a C compiler or other > build tools.
Since I don't write any c code I am not aware. Gems doesn't have a facility for compiling? I though t did. Well, however Gems works is how Gembundles would work too. It just adds an extra multiple-package delivery layer. T. _______________________________________________ Rubygems-developers mailing list Rubygems-developers@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
