From: Jason Roelofs <jameskilton@...>
Date: 2009-08-04T02:16:09+09:00
Subject: Re: Fwd: ruby_frame in 1.8 is what in 1.9?

--0016363b81eaf1b84e04703fec2c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 9:39 AM, Roger Pack <rogerpack2005@gmail.com> wrote:

> > /usr/bin/ruby_includes [--for=version_string]     where version_string
> > are
> > things like "1.9.1" "1.9.2" and probably need "1.9.2p[patch]" depending
> > on
> > if headers change for a patch level.
>
> An excellent idea.  I'll probably work on a gem for it saturday [or if
> another interested party wants to start working on it, I can fork
> whatever exists at that point].
> Just want to be able to do a painless "gem install ruby-debug" for 1.9
> :)
>
> A further elaboration of the project [should anyone ever require it]
> would be to auto-download headers for unknown patch numbers, like "oh
> they are 1.9.2 patch 143 I'll see if I can download
> ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/1.9/ruby-1.9.2-p143.tar.gz and extract
> it locally."
>
> That would make for a somewhat long gem install, though.  Maybe we
> should stick with hard-coded patch numbers for now :)
>
> =r
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
>
>
I'm think that to start it does hard coding and with a fallback so that
(e.g.) 1.9.2p143 falls back to 1.9.2p98 if p143 isn't in the gem yet.

Yeah, I like this idea. Should probably be called ruby_includes or
ruby_headers for clarity's sake. I'm jameskilton on github incase I get
around to making the repo before you do.

Jason

--0016363b81eaf1b84e04703fec2c--