Dne 7.2.2012 08:50, Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Dne 30.1.2012 15:14, Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Dne 30.1.2012 14:57, TASAKA Mamoru napsal(a):
Vít Ondruch wrote, at 01/30/2012 05:19 PM +9:00:
Dne 30.1.2012 07:22, Bohuslav Kabrda napsal(a):
- Original Message -
On Monday, January 23, 2012 05:31
Dne 30.1.2012 15:14, Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Dne 30.1.2012 14:57, TASAKA Mamoru napsal(a):
Vít Ondruch wrote, at 01/30/2012 05:19 PM +9:00:
Dne 30.1.2012 07:22, Bohuslav Kabrda napsal(a):
- Original Message -
On Monday, January 23, 2012 05:31:32 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 13.1.2012 02:
Dne 30.1.2012 14:57, TASAKA Mamoru napsal(a):
Vít Ondruch wrote, at 01/30/2012 05:19 PM +9:00:
Dne 30.1.2012 07:22, Bohuslav Kabrda napsal(a):
- Original Message -
On Monday, January 23, 2012 05:31:32 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 13.1.2012 02:59, Michael Stahnke napsal(a):
Has gem2rpm b
Vít Ondruch wrote, at 01/30/2012 05:19 PM +9:00:
Dne 30.1.2012 07:22, Bohuslav Kabrda napsal(a):
- Original Message -
On Monday, January 23, 2012 05:31:32 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 13.1.2012 02:59, Michael Stahnke napsal(a):
Has gem2rpm been updated for the Ruby 1.9 changes? The
guide
Dne 30.1.2012 07:22, Bohuslav Kabrda napsal(a):
- Original Message -
On Monday, January 23, 2012 05:31:32 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 13.1.2012 02:59, Michael Stahnke napsal(a):
Has gem2rpm been updated for the Ruby 1.9 changes? The
guidelines
seem quite a bit different, an the gem2rpm
- Original Message -
> On Monday, January 23, 2012 05:31:32 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > Dne 13.1.2012 02:59, Michael Stahnke napsal(a):
> > > Has gem2rpm been updated for the Ruby 1.9 changes? The
> > > guidelines
> > > seem quite a bit different, an the gem2rpm macros in the current
> > > s
On Monday, January 23, 2012 05:31:32 PM Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne 13.1.2012 02:59, Michael Stahnke napsal(a):
> > Has gem2rpm been updated for the Ruby 1.9 changes? The guidelines
> > seem quite a bit different, an the gem2rpm macros in the current state
> > (at least on EL6) don't map up. Things
Dne 13.1.2012 02:59, Michael Stahnke napsal(a):
Has gem2rpm been updated for the Ruby 1.9 changes? The guidelines
seem quite a bit different, an the gem2rpm macros in the current state
(at least on EL6) don't map up. Things like
%gemdir rather than %gem_dir.
___
Running Ruby 1.9.3, I get these from RbConfig:
irb(main):003:0> RbConfig::CONFIG['ruby_version']
=> "1.9.1"
irb(main):004:0> RbConfig::CONFIG['LIBRUBY']
=> "libruby.so.1.9.1"
irb(main):005:0> RbConfig::CONFIG['RUBY_PROGRAM_VERSION']
=> "1.9.3"
Could you provide a specific case of the incompatibil
Running Ruby 1.9.3, I get these from RbConfig:
irb(main):003:0> RbConfig::CONFIG['ruby_version']
=> "1.9.1"
irb(main):004:0> RbConfig::CONFIG['LIBRUBY']
=> "libruby.so.1.9.1"
irb(main):005:0> RbConfig::CONFIG['RUBY_PROGRAM_VERSION']
=> "1.9.3"
Could you provide a specific case of the incompatibil
I started making a patch for Ruby 1.9 and ran into something odd. The
1.9.3 rpms built from the ruby.spec project, provide a ruby(abi) of
1.9.1. I assure you that 1.9.3 and 1.9.1 are not 100% compatible.
Could we move the ruby.spec rpms to 1.9.3? Or if we want something
more generic possibly 1.9
Dne 13.1.2012 02:59, Michael Stahnke napsal(a):
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Michael Stahnke wrote:
Has gem2rpm been updated for the Ruby 1.9 changes? The guidelines
seem quite a bit different, an the gem2rpm macros in the current state
(at least on EL6) don't map up. Things like
%gemdir
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Michael Stahnke wrote:
> Has gem2rpm been updated for the Ruby 1.9 changes? The guidelines
> seem quite a bit different, an the gem2rpm macros in the current state
> (at least on EL6) don't map up. Things like
>
> %gemdir rather than %gem_dir.
I probably should
Has gem2rpm been updated for the Ruby 1.9 changes? The guidelines
seem quite a bit different, an the gem2rpm macros in the current state
(at least on EL6) don't map up. Things like
%gemdir rather than %gem_dir.
___
ruby-sig mailing list
ruby-sig@lists.
14 matches
Mail list logo
