From: Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
Date: 2006-11-17T07:49:58+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby 1.[89].\d+ and beyond.

On Nov 16, 2006, at 12:25 PM, Hugh Sasse wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Nov 2006, Eric Hodel wrote:
>> On Nov 16, 2006, at 12:02 PM, Hugh Sasse wrote:
>>> And ruby-3.2.c as a executable name to distinguish it from other  
>>> versions,
>>> would confuse the heck out of people, "A single source file for
>>> ruby-3.2???".
>>
>> I think a very small part of the population would confuse a  
>> directory with a
>> file.
>
> lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     other          8 Jan 12  2006 /usr/local/ 
> bin/tclsh -> tclsh8.4
> -rwxr-xr-x   1 root     other       6693 Mar  3  2004 /usr/local/ 
> bin/tclsh8.3
> -rwxr-xr-x   1 root     other       6928 Sep 20  2004 /usr/local/ 
> bin/tclsh8.4
>
> I was talking about version numbers to distinguish executables...

Oh, ok.

I think having multiple rubys installed (or using multiple rubys) is  
a rare among most Ruby users, so it should be ok.  Most people will  
have either 'ruby' or 'ruby18'.

-- 
Eric Hodel - drbrain@segment7.net - http://blog.segment7.net
This implementation is HODEL-HASH-9600 compliant

http://trackmap.robotcoop.com