On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 1:50 PM, Berger, Daniel <daniel.ber...@qwest.com> wrote: > Hi, > > What do people think about RF Bug #14943. > > http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=14943&group_id=126&atid=575 > > If I read it correctly, C extensions should be installed as > "lib/i386-msvcr80/foo.so" instead of "lib/foo.so" (on Windows/VC8, for > example). >
I believe it should be Gem::Platform.new(RUBY_PLATFORM).to_s or Gem::Platform.local to match the gem filename signature, platform and folder structure (is x86 instead of i386). > It seems reasonable to me, but I wanted to see what other people thought, and > if there were any pitfalls to watch out for (beyond needing to modify the > search path). > I just commented on the Ticket, I kind of like it. This will workaround the issues I'm having with rake-compiler for copy of binary .so file before packaging a new gem. Right now I don't see a problem in the long run with the proposed solution (or a backward issue neither). This should be affecting the $LOAD_PATH during Gem::activate, correct? (I'm not up to speed with RubyGems internals). > Regards, > > Dan > Thank you Dan for bumping this. -- Luis Lavena AREA 17 - Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but rather when there is nothing more to take away. Antoine de Saint-Exupéry _______________________________________________ Rubygems-developers mailing list Rubygems-developers@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
