[#2139] Best way to install ri documentation — Dave Thomas <dave@...>

Folks:

69 messages 2004/01/04
[#2140] Re: Best way to install ri documentation — Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@...> 2004/01/04

On Monday, January 5, 2004, 2:29:57 AM, Dave wrote:

[#2141] Re: Best way to install ri documentation — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2004/01/04

Hi,

[#2145] Re: Best way to install ri documentation — Richard Kilmer <rich@...> 2004/01/05

Perhaps make it available for mirrors and save ruby-lang's bandwidth?

[#2147] Re: Best way to install ri documentation — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2004/01/05

[#2148] Re: Best way to install ri documentation -- please check this — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2004/01/05

So, I'm thinking about doing the following? Is this OK with everyone?

[#2149] Re: Best way to install ri documentation -- please check this — "J.Herre" <jlst@...> 2004/01/05

[#2152] Re: Best way to install ri documentation -- please check this — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2004/01/05

[#2153] Re: Best way to install ri documentation -- please check this — nobu.nokada@... 2004/01/05

Hi,

[#2154] Re: Best way to install ri documentation -- please check this — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2004/01/05

[#2219] Re: Best way to install ri documentation -- please check this — "James F. Hranicky" <jfh@...> 2004/01/12

On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 00:47:41 +0900

[#2194] File.readable_world? and File.writable_world? — Ian Macdonald <ian@...>

Hello,

27 messages 2004/01/09
[#2195] Re: [PATCH] File.readable_world? and File.writable_world? — Eivind Eklund <eivind@...> 2004/01/09

On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 06:02:07PM +0900, Ian Macdonald wrote:

[#2199] Re: [PATCH] File.readable_world? and File.writable_world? — Ian Macdonald <ian@...> 2004/01/09

On Fri 09 Jan 2004 at 23:10:02 +0900, Eivind Eklund wrote:

[#2200] Re: [PATCH] File.readable_world? and File.writable_world? — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2004/01/10

Hi,

[#2203] Re: [PATCH] File.readable_world? and File.writable_world? — Ian Macdonald <ian@...> 2004/01/11

On Sun 11 Jan 2004 at 00:47:33 +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#2206] Re: [PATCH] File.readable_world? and File.writable_world? — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2004/01/11

Hi,

[#2208] Re: [PATCH] File.readable_world? and File.writable_world? — Ian Macdonald <ian@...> 2004/01/11

On Sun 11 Jan 2004 at 21:40:22 +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#2209] Re: [PATCH] File.readable_world? and File.writable_world? — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2004/01/12

Hi,

[#2216] ruby aborts in data-handling applications — xsdg <xsdg@...>

I reported a similar bug about 2 or 3 months ago. The problem seemed to go

12 messages 2004/01/12

Re: Absolute paths in shebang lines?

From: "J.Herre" <jlst@...>
Date: 2004-01-08 00:10:02 UTC
List: ruby-core #2188
On Jan 7, 2004, at 12:31 PM, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

> Can you describe "what one would expect" and "little confusing"
> situation you are worrying?
>

Sorry I was a little vague.  Here's what I did that caught me up.

Installed ruby_1_8 branch in my home directory for testing under ~/stmp;
Then tried

~/stmp/bin/ri Array#length

Of course this fails because I need to do

~/stmp/bin/ruby ~/stmp/bin/ri Array#length

to pick up the correct ruby

Not a big deal.  OTOH I used to work at a site which had thousands of 
users and maintained separate /prod, /beta, and /devel mounts for all 
software officially "released".  The idea being that some users could 
run from /beta/bin while most were still using /prod/bin.  Etc.  You 
get the idea.  To try out the new version you'd run /devel/bin/ruby.

My worry is that people will explicitly run /devel/bin/irb and not 
realize that it's not new version but the old one.  The one that's in 
their PATH.  In my case, I'd be getting ri documentation from 
/prod/lib/ruby when I thought I was explicitly asking for 
/devel/lib/ruby

Another way this could screw up is if someone were trying to automate 
tasks via scipting.  Say for example you want to generate a bunch of 
rdoc documentation from some common directories via cron.  A naive 
sysadmin might do the following

/usr/local/bin/rdoc ...

This has the potential to fail due to a mis-configured PATH.  To be 
safe you'd do

/usr/local/bin/ruby /usr/local/bin/rdoc ...

or

PATH=/usr/local/bin /usr/local/bin/rdoc ...

Even worse, the update_my_rdoc script above might fail for some users 
while it works for others.

In my own case, I could do

cd ~/stmp/bin; ./ri

and it will still fail.  I'm saved by my knowledge that ri is really a 
ruby script but naive users might find it confusing.

-J








In This Thread