Re: Ruby 1.9.1 package release plan
On 22/07/09 at 08:24 +0900, akira yamada / ?????? wrote:
> >>> use alternatives so that the user can select the version of ruby he
> >>> wants, but then we would have to fix all the ruby applications that use
> >>> /usr/bin/ruby first (so that they hardcode the version of ruby they want
> >>> to work with).
> >> I don't like alternatives for that usage.
> >> Users assume all alternatives works fine with all other programs.
> >> (ruby1.9(.0) foo.rb, ruby1.9(.1) foo.rb and ruby1.9(.2) works as the same.)
> >>
> >> We should have standard "ruby" for users and packages.
> >> I think that "/usr/bin/ruby" should be provided by a package
> >> such as ruby-default.
> >
> > Having packages use /usr/bin/ruby is a problem when we want to switch
> > from ruby1.8 to ruby1.9 for /usr/bin/ruby. We should check that every
> > package using /usr/bin/ruby works with ruby1.9 first.
>
> I agree.
>
> But I intended to say that
> alternatives is not fit for that usage.
>
> If we proved ruby1.9.x packages and
> we use alternatives for all ruby1.9.x,
> we should check many packages.
That could be a useful goal for squeeze.
--
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |
Reply to: