On 2007-11-05 12:05:22 -0500, Trans wrote:
> On Nov 5, 2007 10:07 AM, Austin Ziegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 11/5/07, Luis Lavena <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > The problem will that will be how identify extensions compiled for
> > > windows, linux or darwin, all in the same package.
> >
> > > Kernel#require is not clever as rubygems require version to find the
> > > matching -mswin32 or -darwin or -bsd version of the specific
> > > extension.
> >
> > Hmmm. It'd be nice if we did put the platform-arch stuff in the built
> > files in RubyGems, though. It'd solve some problems with LSB/FHS
> > compliance for those who care about that (e.g.,
> > i386-mswin32/http11.so). You could install the same gem for multiple
> > platforms without collision and have the ruby for that platform Do The
> > Right Thing.
>
> Do you mean what I was basically thinking?
>
> lib/
> whatever.rb
> i386-mswin32/
> http11.so
> i386-linux/
> http11.so
> ...
>
> RubyGems could figure the proper load path for the platform, it could
> also remove the unneccessary paths in install since they are just
> wasting space. But we'd only need a single gem. Yes, it would bigger
> file, but I would think it worth the convenience.
>
> BTW why is the Windows an .so and not a .dll? Cygwin?
there is already a bug open for that.
darix
--
openSUSE - SUSE Linux is my linux
openSUSE is good for you
www.opensuse.org
_______________________________________________
Rubygems-developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
