From: Robert Dober Date: 2006-11-26T18:20:40+09:00 Subject: Re: site_ruby ------=_Part_4316_18855876.1164532837409 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On 11/26/06, Trans wrote: > > > Daniel DeLorme wrote: > > Can anyone explain what the site_ruby directory is for? Why use that > directory > > instead of /usr/local/lib/ruby/ ? Only rubygems seems to use that > directory. > > Well, that's a good question. One point is that /usr/local/lib/ruby is > where ruby's standard libs are installed (if local install, otherwise > /usr/lib/ruby) it's really only by the grace of the version folder > (1.8) that gems can use this location cleanly. Unfortunately Debian > packages completely ignore this distinction and install ruby packages > right in there with the standard lib --which makes it impossible to > distingusih standard libs from non-standard (not nice). Ahh I failed to notice, well I realized that apt-get was not going well with gem, good to know why. That amongst other problems I have posted about recently have driven me to switch from Sarge to Gentoo in our network of routers and firewalls. A recent discussion indicated that the the FHS would have us place > these files in /usr/share/ruby or /usr/local/share/ruby. And sure > enough that's what Perl does --though it seems wrong to me. I would > think /usr/lib/ruby/site and /usr/local/lib/ruby/site, along side gem, > would be optimal. > > T. I use site_ruby intensively to put my own libs, I thaught this was its main purpose, was I wrong? Cheers Robert -- The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. - George Bernard Shaw ------=_Part_4316_18855876.1164532837409--