[#7055] More on VC++ 2005 — Austin Ziegler <halostatue@...>

Okay. I've got Ruby compiling. I'm attempting to get everything in

17 messages 2006/01/05
[#7058] Re: More on VC++ 2005 — nobuyoshi nakada <nobuyoshi.nakada@...> 2006/01/06

Hi,

[#7084] mathn: ugly warnings — hadmut@... (Hadmut Danisch)

Hi,

22 messages 2006/01/10
[#7097] Re: mathn: ugly warnings — Daniel Berger <Daniel.Berger@...> 2006/01/10

Hadmut Danisch wrote:

[#7098] Design contracts and refactoring (was Re: mathn: ugly warnings) — mathew <meta@...> 2006/01/10

Daniel Berger wrote:

[#7118] Re: Design contracts and refactoring (was Re: mathn: ugly warnings) — mathew <meta@...> 2006/01/12

*Dean Wampler *<deanwampler gmail.com> writes:

[#7226] Fwd: Re: Question about massive API changes — "Sean E. Russell" <ser@...>

Hello,

23 messages 2006/01/28
[#7228] Re: Question about massive API changes — Caleb Tennis <caleb@...> 2006/01/28

>

Re: [PATCH] Ruby 1.9 and FHS

From: Austin Ziegler <halostatue@...>
Date: 2006-01-23 13:25:48 UTC
List: ruby-core #7187
On 23/01/06, Kirill A. Shutemov <k.shutemov@sam-solutions.net> wrote:
> Build and install system changes:
>
> FHS:
>
> - pure-ruby files install separete from ruby extentions(binary).
>   /usr/share/ruby/X.Y for *.rb
>   /usr/lib/ruby/X.Y for *.so
>
> - ruby headers install to /usr/include/ruby/X.Y/
>
> Non-FHS:
>
> - vendor-specific ruby-modules dirs. It's useful for a distribution. We
>   have three type of ruby-modules:
>   1. stdlib
>   2. vendor-specific(a ruby modules prepared for a distribution)
>   3. user's modules which installed by hand

I don't think that this is a useful modification. If a particular
repackager wants to use this, feel free, but I think that the current
installation layout is more than sufficient and is overall better for
its cleanliness.

If you want something more applicable that makes it useful to
repackagers and people who couldn't care less about the Linux-specific
FHS (e.g., anyone using Windows or a Unix other than Linux), make it
something which can be applied with a specific configure option (e.g.,
--enable-fhs-install). Even when I use Linux, if I'm installing from
source, I don't necessarily want to follow FHS, and your patch *only*
allows for FHS installs on Linux.

Also, your change to --with-sitedir is not appropriate, since binary
extensions can end up there.

-austin
--
Austin Ziegler * halostatue@gmail.com
               * Alternate: austin@halostatue.ca


In This Thread