[#1884] multiple exceptions for assert_raises — nobu.nokada@...

Hi,

14 messages 2003/12/04

[#1932] --enable-pthread broken? — Nathaniel Talbott <nathaniel@...>

[ruby-talk: 87759] and the surrounding thread seem to indicate that

29 messages 2003/12/11
[#1933] Re: --enable-pthread broken? — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2003/12/11

Hi,

[#1934] Re: --enable-pthread broken? — Nathaniel Talbott <nathaniel@...> 2003/12/11

On Dec 11, 2003, at 11:49, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#1935] Re: --enable-pthread broken? — ts <decoux@...> 2003/12/11

>>>>> "N" == Nathaniel Talbott <nathaniel@talbott.ws> writes:

[#1937] Re: --enable-pthread broken? — nobu.nokada@... 2003/12/11

Hi,

[#1938] Re: --enable-pthread broken? — Nathaniel Talbott <nathaniel@...> 2003/12/12

On Dec 11, 2003, at 16:10, nobu.nokada@softhome.net wrote:

[#1939] Re: --enable-pthread broken? — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2003/12/12

Hi,

[#1941] Re: --enable-pthread broken? — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2003/12/12

Hi,

[#1943] Re: --enable-pthread broken? — Nathaniel Talbott <nathaniel@...> 2003/12/12

On Dec 11, 2003, at 20:48, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#1953] Re: --enable-pthread broken? — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2003/12/13

Hi,

[#1959] Re: --enable-pthread broken? — ts <decoux@...> 2003/12/14

>>>>> "Y" == Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> writes:

[#1961] Re: --enable-pthread broken? — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2003/12/15

Hi,

[#1962] Re: --enable-pthread broken? — ts <decoux@...> 2003/12/15

>>>>> "Y" == Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> writes:

[#1936] Can't define +@ for Symbol (plus ruby install problem) — "T. Onoma" <transami@...>

I wanted to see if the +@ problem was fixed in 1.8.1 preview 3 but when I do

11 messages 2003/12/11

[#1973] Where to install documentation — Dave Thomas <dave@...>

Folks:

48 messages 2003/12/15
[#1982] Re: Where to install documentation — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net> 2003/12/15

Dave Thomas (dave@pragprog.com) wrote:

[#1984] Re: Where to install documentation — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2003/12/15

[#1991] Re: Where to install documentation — "Gavin Sinclair" <gsinclair@...> 2003/12/16

>

[#1992] Re: Where to install documentation — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2003/12/16

[#2000] Re: Where to install documentation — Minero Aoki <aamine@...> 2003/12/16

Hi,

[#2002] Re: Where to install documentation — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2003/12/16

[#2037] --enable-pthread still segfaults... — Nathaniel Talbott <nathaniel@...>

I've finally been able to test my application under load using the

25 messages 2003/12/23
[#2038] Re: --enable-pthread still segfaults... — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2003/12/23

Hi,

[#2039] Re: --enable-pthread still segfaults... — Nathaniel Talbott <nathaniel@...> 2003/12/23

On Dec 23, 2003, at 14:17, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#2040] Re: --enable-pthread still segfaults... — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2003/12/23

Hi,

[#2041] Re: --enable-pthread still segfaults... — Nathaniel Talbott <nathaniel@...> 2003/12/23

On Dec 23, 2003, at 14:34, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#2042] Re: --enable-pthread still segfaults... — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2003/12/23

Hi,

[#2043] Re: --enable-pthread still segfaults... — Nathaniel Talbott <nathaniel@...> 2003/12/23

On Dec 23, 2003, at 14:44, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#2045] Re: --enable-pthread still segfaults... — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2003/12/23

Hi,

[#2046] Re: --enable-pthread still segfaults... — Nathaniel Talbott <nathaniel@...> 2003/12/23

> I'm afraid you're using old configure file. Can you wipe off old

[#2049] Re: --enable-pthread still segfaults... — Nathaniel Talbott <nathaniel@...> 2003/12/23

On Dec 23, 2003, at 15:18, Nathaniel Talbott wrote:

[#2050] Re: --enable-pthread still segfaults... — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2003/12/23

In message "Re: --enable-pthread still segfaults..."

[#2122] Bad interaction between timeout.rb and --enable-pthread — Nathaniel Talbott <nathaniel@...>

Here's a testcase that shows the problem:

13 messages 2003/12/31
[#2123] sleep is broken with --enable-pthread [Was: Bad interaction between timeout.rb and --enable-pthread] — Nathaniel Talbott <nathaniel@...> 2003/12/31

I should have reduced it more before posting...

Re: Where to install documentation

From: Chad Fowler <chad@...>
Date: 2003-12-16 00:58:08 UTC
List: ruby-core #1989
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003, Dave Thomas wrote:

# 
# On Dec 15, 2003, at 15:59, Chad Fowler wrote:
# 
# > OWe have actually been doing the following for RubyGems (so far--we're 
# > of
# > course open for suggestions):
# >
# > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/#{ruby_version}/doc/#{gem_name}-#{gem_version}
# >
# > ...this is, of course, the standard rdoc html output--not the new ri
# > intermediate form.
# 
# The problem here is that 'ri' will have a hard job finding the most 
# current among all these directories: I'm keen not to slow things down 
# too much.
# 


I agree that it's potentially a bit messy, but I wouldn't put too much 
emphasis on speed.  I just ran a very unscientific test on my 
Windows-based laptop, and only hit around 800ms with 10,000 libraries 
"installed", including doing version comparisons (using David Black's 
version.rb from RubyGems) to find the highest version of each library.  
(note: the 10,000 "libraries" were really just 10,000 programatically 
generated subdirectories).


# It would be nice to have symbolic links so that:
# 
#     gems/1.8/doc/fred-latest
# 
# could always reference the latest version of 'fred' that's installed, 
# but I guess that couldn't work under Windows.

Yea, that's too bad.

# Perhaps the simplest 
# thing would be always to install documentation to
# 
#     site_ruby/1.8/doc/...
# 
# and _also_ install it under the gems structure above. That way, 'ri 
# fred' would always find the last version installed, while you could 
# geta  specific version by giving ri a path to the specific doc 
# directory:
# 
#    ri -d /usr/local/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/...


That makes sense.  Duplicating the data puts me off a bit, but at least 
it's *generated* duplicate stuff.


# 
# However, I'd also question the gems structure here. Shouldn't the gems 
# stuff be under site_ruby? Perhaps
# 
#      /usr/local/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/gems/....
# 


Good question.  I don't have a strong opinion on this one, but I think the 
idea was that RubyGems are not really like the stuff that normally goes 
under site_ruby, so they should be contained in a new path, parrallel to 
site_ruby.  An installed RubyGem is a full directory that can be added to 
$:, as opposed to just being files and directories that are picked up in 
the normal $:.  




# I have to admit I'm still confused by the Ruby directory standards: 
# some clarification would be very helpful from matz....
# 


Same here.

Chad


In This Thread