On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 12:33 AM, Stephen Bannasch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 6:22 PM -0700 6/3/08, Jeremy Kemper wrote: >>On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Eric Hodel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> I believe RubyGems is currently feature-complete for the next release. For >>> the next while I'll be focusing on bugfixes and patches from the tracker. I >>> expect to release a new version in two weeks at minimum, possibly longer. >> >>I'd love to see little-known --format-executable enabled by default >>for gem installs. >> >>This gives you bin stubs that match your ruby name, e.g. rake-1.9 for >>ruby-1.9 and rake for ruby. Currently, both are installed as rake so >>the latest install clobbers the previous one. This is confusing and >>aggravating but few are aware that --format-executable solves it. >> >>Changing the default would be a welcome improvement in gem install >>experience for those working with multiple rubies and doesn't change >>behavior for the 95% who aren't. Plus, the 1.2 release is an >>auspicious opportunity to flip the switch just as 1.8.7 is out and >>1.9.1 nears release. > > I would like the opposite to be the default. > > I keep all my different ruby installations separate -- I have different lib, > bin, and gem repo paths for 1.8.6, 1.9. rbx, and jruby. I don't see how a > single gem repository can work when gems that require native code and > connections to ruby VM libraries are combined.
Unless I'm missing something, your setup is unaffected by this option because you don't use the program prefix or suffix. jeremy _______________________________________________ Rubygems-developers mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
