From: Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@...>
Date: 2005-09-24T00:29:00+09:00
Subject: Re: RubyGems in Ruby HEAD

On 24/09/05 at 00:07 +0900, Pascal Terjan wrote:
> > >> Why not? Many Ruby libraries have no non-Ruby code, so there's no
> > >> difference between a 'binary' and a 'source' version of them. Plus,
> > >> surely it's possible to mark that (say) openssl-ruby depends on
> > >> having a C compiler and openssl-dev?  If necessary for policy
> > >> reasons, mark it as a 'source' rather than a 'binary' package.
> > > And then people will install a compiler on their server to ease
> > > exploits ? or remove the compiler after each install ?
> >
> > Sorry, but that's a red herring as RubyGems already supports precompiled
> > binary gems.
> 
> They need to be available for the given distro (with the right lib
> versions, ...)

And for the given architectures : i386 m68k sparc alpha powerpc arm
mips mipsel hppa ia64 s390 for Debian. How are you going to generate
your gem on those archs ?
-- 
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net   http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr             GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |