On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 1:23 AM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> I'm talking about applications like booh, alexandria, puppet, etc. Of
> course, they can be installed from gems, but then the admin has to
> do all the support himself (check for security updates, etc).
>
You can do gem update to get the s
On 25/06/09 at 21:58 -, Darren Hinderer wrote:
> > And how would you deal with installing apps? especially the ones that
> > are compiled?
>
> I'm not positive I understand your question, but the way we install
> gems that compile with 1.8.7 would be the same as with 1.9.1. We
> install the ru
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 6:31 PM, Victor Costan wrote:
> For whatever it's worth, I'm on the same boat with patcito. Please give
> us good 1.9.1 version of ruby, ruby-dev and rubygems, and we'll take it
> from there.
>
rubygem is built in ruby1.9 so we just need ruby and ruby-dev :)
--
[needs-p
> And how would you deal with installing apps? especially the ones that
> are compiled?
I'm not positive I understand your question, but the way we install
gems that compile with 1.8.7 would be the same as with 1.9.1. We
install the ruby-dev package, and any other ubuntu lib packages that
the gem
On 25/06/09 at 21:19 -, donpdonp wrote:
> i second Darrin's comment. I have no interest in ruby-support. I have
> ruby 1.9.0 happily installed and living side-by-side with ruby 1.8. Ruby
> itself manages the gems etc for different versions of ruby inside
> /usr/lib/ruby/.
>
> I want to do an a
Well I have done that, but I want ruby to be supported by my OS. The
libraries that I run on it are simply much less important to me than
the actual executable. I can ask the author of my library for support,
or go fork their work and update it myself in a timely manner.
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 2:
On 25/06/09 at 20:29 -, Darren Hinderer wrote:
> I have no need for ruby-support as you have described it. I think its
> fair to say that most of us are content to suck down our libraries
> direct from rubygems or even github. IMHO the ruby community is
> growing and moving too fast for ubuntu
I have no need for ruby-support as you have described it. I think its
fair to say that most of us are content to suck down our libraries
direct from rubygems or even github. IMHO the ruby community is
growing and moving too fast for ubuntu to try to manage all of the
packages out there. In fact I'd
On 25/06/09 at 19:57 -, patcito wrote:
> If ubuntu is already packaging 1.9.0 with no ruby-support, why not
> upgrade it to 1.9.1? ruby-support can wait for karmic+1. I'm probably
> missing something.
ruby-support would allow to magically get support for all ruby versions
(inc. jruby), for all
On 25/06/09 at 18:55 -, patcito wrote:
> I'm running Karmic and ruby 1.9.1 is still not available, will Karmic
> get it? Also, unlike Python 3.0, most ruby libs have been ported to
> 1.9.1 already, see http://isitruby19.com/ that includes hpricot, mysql,
> rails etc
Depends if someone is going
On 18/05/09 at 13:02 -, Niels Ganser wrote:
> With the recent release of the new version that donpdonp has pointed
> out, they are already lacking behind though.. :)
ah ah.
--
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lu...@nussbaum.fr
11 matches
Mail list logo
