[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

ruby 1.8 in the freebsd ports tree

culley harrelson

12/2/2003 8:16:00 PM

Does anyone have ruby 1.8 + libraries working from the freebsd ports
tree? I have ruby 1.6 and ruby 1.8 installed from ports but any attempt
to install other ruby ports puts them in the 1.6 library. Upon
installation the 1.8 port says:

==
To build a ruby related port for Ruby 1.8, define RUBY_VER=1.8 on the
make command line or in /etc/make.conf. If you want to use Ruby 1.8
as the default instead of 1.6, define RUBY_DEFAULT_VER=1.8 also.
==

But this seems to have no effect when, for instance, trying to
re-install ruby-rmail into the 1.8 library. I have updated
/etc/make.conf, tried passing in the parameter to make via portupgrade,
tried making the port without portupgrade and tried setting RUBY_VER and
RUBY_DEFAULT_VER as environment variables.

I wanted to see if anyone had any suggestions before I break away from
the ports tree and install these manually. I have also asked on the
freebsd-questions mailing list.

culley
5 Answers

Manfred Lotz

12/2/2003 9:48:00 PM

0

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 05:15:40 +0900, culley harrelson wrote:

> Does anyone have ruby 1.8 + libraries working from the freebsd ports
> tree? I have ruby 1.6 and ruby 1.8 installed from ports but any attempt
> to install other ruby ports puts them in the 1.6 library. Upon
> installation the 1.8 port says:
>
> ==
> To build a ruby related port for Ruby 1.8, define RUBY_VER=1.8 on the
> make command line or in /etc/make.conf. If you want to use Ruby 1.8
> as the default instead of 1.6, define RUBY_DEFAULT_VER=1.8 also.
> ==
>

I have Ruby 1.8 running on FreeBSD 5.2 BETA. In
/etc/make I have

RUBY_VER=1.8
RUBY_DEFAULT_VER=1.8

It works fine. I'm surely not a Ruby expert but I love it and it works
fine for what I'm using it.


Perhaps you should do a pkg_deinstall for the ruby 1.6 and then
install the ruby 1.8 with the settings in /etc/make.conf as mentioned
above.


Manfred

Eric Hodel

12/2/2003 9:59:00 PM

0

culley harrelson (culley@fastmail.fm) wrote:

> Does anyone have ruby 1.8 + libraries working from the freebsd ports
> tree? I have ruby 1.6 and ruby 1.8 installed from ports but any attempt
> to install other ruby ports puts them in the 1.6 library. Upon
> installation the 1.8 port says:
>
> ==
> To build a ruby related port for Ruby 1.8, define RUBY_VER=1.8 on the
> make command line or in /etc/make.conf. If you want to use Ruby 1.8
> as the default instead of 1.6, define RUBY_DEFAULT_VER=1.8 also.
> ==
>
> But this seems to have no effect when, for instance, trying to
> re-install ruby-rmail into the 1.8 library. I have updated
> /etc/make.conf, tried passing in the parameter to make via portupgrade,
> tried making the port without portupgrade and tried setting RUBY_VER and
> RUBY_DEFAULT_VER as environment variables.

What is /usr/local/bin/ruby linked to? ruby16 or ruby18? If it is
linked to ruby16, you'll need to switch it to ruby18 (and irb, maybe
something else too, or reinstall, if you're paranoid) since it seems
that not every ruby port has been updated to use RUBY_VER. Once
you do this, all new ports should install themselves as 1.8 ports.

You need to do this because the port setup scripts (port script, setup.rb,
install.rb) sometimes use /usr/local/lib/ruby (rather than 16 or
18 specifically) so will get installed into whichever tree your
/usr/local/bin/ruby belongs to.

--
Eric Hodel - drbrain@segment7.net - http://se...
All messages signed with fingerprint:
FEC2 57F1 D465 EB15 5D6E 7C11 332A 551C 796C 9F04

culley harrelson

12/2/2003 10:52:00 PM

0

> What is /usr/local/bin/ruby linked to? ruby16 or ruby18? If it is
> linked to ruby16, you'll need to switch it to ruby18 (and irb, maybe
> something else too, or reinstall, if you're paranoid) since it seems
> that not every ruby port has been updated to use RUBY_VER. Once
> you do this, all new ports should install themselves as 1.8 ports.
>
> You need to do this because the port setup scripts (port script, setup.rb,
> install.rb) sometimes use /usr/local/lib/ruby (rather than 16 or
> 18 specifically) so will get installed into whichever tree your
> /usr/local/bin/ruby belongs to.
>

I am currently linked to ruby16. I was under the impression that some
of the freebsd plumbing was dependent on ruby16 and switching these
could possibly cause some trouble. Only one way to find out eh?

culley

Eric Hodel

12/2/2003 11:16:00 PM

0

culley harrelson (culley@fastmail.fm) wrote:

> I am currently linked to ruby16. I was under the impression that some
> of the freebsd plumbing was dependent on ruby16 and switching these
> could possibly cause some trouble. Only one way to find out eh?

Nothing in the base system is wired up to and ruby interpreter.
Unfortunately, portupgrade was a tragedy of my switch, but that was
a quick and easy fix (either reinstall, or hard-code to use ruby16).

--
Eric Hodel - drbrain@segment7.net - http://se...
All messages signed with fingerprint:
FEC2 57F1 D465 EB15 5D6E 7C11 332A 551C 796C 9F04

culley harrelson

12/3/2003 12:10:00 AM

0

I finally got it by deinstalling *everything* that uses ruby, installing
1.8 and then reinstalling everything. Including portupgrade. Kind of a
pain but it is done-- thanks for your help!

culley

>
> Nothing in the base system is wired up to and ruby interpreter.
> Unfortunately, portupgrade was a tragedy of my switch, but that was
> a quick and easy fix (either reinstall, or hard-code to use ruby16).
>