From: Lucas Nussbaum Date: 2007-10-30T01:55:40+09:00 Subject: Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? On 29/10/07 at 12:54 +0900, Austin Ziegler wrote: > On 10/28/07, Bob Proulx wrote: > > Austin Ziegler wrote: > > > Sam Roberts wrote: > > > > Which goes where? > > > Ultimately, I don't care > > You are very very vocal about something that you do not care about! > > I don't care what direction distro maintainers take when they're > making this decision. It's completely irrelevant to Ruby itself, and > it will ONLY have an impact on users of their systems. Although I like > Ubuntu, I will *never* install a package-based Ruby on a Debian system > because the packages for 1.6 and 1.8 were so badly mangled that you > had to install ten *different* packages that didn't always state their > dependencies clearly... and then you'd have to redo some of them > because Debian (in its infinite zealotry) doesn't think that OpenSSL > is Free Enough and therefore doesn't install it by default and you > can't do that thing you could do out of the box on windows. Or > something like that. Austin, please stop spreading FUD. > Or you get the Ruby on Tiger snafu: it was compiled as PPC with Intel > endianness, which meant that PDF::Writer and a handful of other > packages would never be able to work because String#unpack would never > work. And like a good citizen, you reported a bug about that, of course? -- | Lucas Nussbaum | lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |