Comments on: A Longish Post about Package Names and Versioning http://lylejohnson.name/blog/2006/05/31/a-longish-post-about-package-names-and-versioning/ Covering Software Development with Ruby and FXRuby Wed, 27 Apr 2011 21:18:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: Jim Weirich http://lylejohnson.name/blog/2006/05/31/a-longish-post-about-package-names-and-versioning/comment-page-1/#comment-317 Jim Weirich Thu, 01 Jun 2006 17:17:05 +0000 http://lylejohnson.name/blog/?p=148#comment-317 Tobias, regarding your Gem issues: (1) This is the default behavior of RubyGems. (2) If a required library is installed as a non-gem, then RubyGems isn't able to detect the installation, but you can instruct it to go ahead and install without installing dependencies. As long as the library is really there, it will work fine. (3) The environment variable is not required, but the other workarounds are not much better. I'm open to suggestions here. Tobias, regarding your Gem issues:

(1) This is the default behavior of RubyGems.

(2) If a required library is installed as a non-gem, then RubyGems isn’t able to detect the installation, but you can instruct it to go ahead and install without installing dependencies. As long as the library is really there, it will work fine.

(3) The environment variable is not required, but the other workarounds are not much better. I’m open to suggestions here.

]]> By: Jim Weirich http://lylejohnson.name/blog/2006/05/31/a-longish-post-about-package-names-and-versioning/comment-page-1/#comment-316 Jim Weirich Thu, 01 Jun 2006 17:09:00 +0000 http://lylejohnson.name/blog/?p=148#comment-316 [...] doesn’t seem to be quite resolved yet. The "gem" instruction is available in the CVS head right now and is available as a preview from http://onestepback.org/betagems. [...] doesn’t seem to be quite resolved yet.

The “gem” instruction is available in the CVS head right now and is available as a preview from http://onestepback.org/betagems.

]]> By: Tobias http://lylejohnson.name/blog/2006/05/31/a-longish-post-about-package-names-and-versioning/comment-page-1/#comment-313 Tobias Thu, 01 Jun 2006 07:15:37 +0000 http://lylejohnson.name/blog/?p=148#comment-313 On my linux computers, I already have a package manager (dpkg or rpm), and I don't want a second package manager (rubygem) to interfere with them. And I use GNU stow for installing software not provided by the distributor As a result, I have not managed to install rails except on a debian testing system, for which debian provides a rails package and supporting packages. If fxruby takes the same route and makes installation without rubygems difficult to impossible, then I'd rather fall back to ruby-gtk despite the difficulties of using that on windows. I would use gems on linux only if (1) it could be restricted to only modify files below some dedicatet directory (like /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems, or /home/tobias/lib/ruby/gems). I believe, but do not know for sure, that this is already possible? (2) gems would not insist on installing and using its own version of ruby libraries that are required by another gem package. If the required library is already installed on the system in a sufficient version, it should use that. (3) gems would not require me to set the environment variable RUBYOPT. This especially is a pain on windows systems, where gems would come in handy to manage ruby packages, but it interferes badly with the ruby interpreter installed by cygwin, which of course has its own package manager, and no "ubygems" library. On my linux computers, I already have a package manager (dpkg or rpm), and I don’t want a second package manager (rubygem) to interfere with them. And I use GNU stow for installing software not provided by the distributor

As a result, I have not managed to install rails except on a debian testing system, for which debian provides a rails package and supporting packages. If fxruby takes the same route and makes installation without rubygems difficult to impossible, then I’d rather fall back to ruby-gtk despite the difficulties of using that on windows.

I would use gems on linux only if
(1) it could be restricted to only modify files below some dedicatet directory (like /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems, or /home/tobias/lib/ruby/gems). I believe, but do not know for sure, that this is already possible?
(2) gems would not insist on installing and using its own version of ruby libraries that are required by another gem package. If the required library is already installed on the system in a sufficient version, it should use that.
(3) gems would not require me to set the environment variable RUBYOPT. This especially is a pain on windows systems, where gems would come in handy to manage ruby packages, but it interferes badly with the ruby interpreter installed by cygwin, which of course has its own package manager, and no “ubygems” library.

]]>