From: "Shot (Piotr Szotkowski)" <shot@...>
Date: 2009-12-13T07:58:36+09:00
Subject: Re: Is it possible to force a Ruby program to run as a proc name	different than "ruby"?

--Nq2Wo0NMKNjxTN9z
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I=C3=B1aki Baz Castillo:

> However in /proc/PID/status I still have the same described
> issues: "Name: ruby1.9", so I cannot do "killall rb_program".

> This can be solved by using:
>   #!/usr/local/bin/ruby1.9
> rather than:
>   #!/usr/bin/env ruby1.9

> but of course hardcoding the location of ruby is not very good
> approach (specially when you want your code to run on any Linux
> system).

I was wondering about exactly this problem recently. I=E2=80=99m using
hand-rolled Ruby 1.9.1 and 1.8.7 versions in ~/opt =E2=80=93 and once I fin=
ally
got to rolling my own gem I found out that when RubyGems install an
executable, they put a wrapper script in the given Ruby installation
path, with the hashbang hardcoded to that interpreter=E2=80=99s binary.

In other words =E2=80=93 while the executables in my repo start with
=E2=80=98#!/usr/bin/env ruby=E2=80=99 (and so pick up the =E2=80=98current=
=E2=80=99 Ruby interpreter),
once I roll and install a gem RubyGems create a custom executable
wrappers for them, and the ones installed with Ruby 1.9.1 start with
=E2=80=98#!/home/shot/opt/ruby-1.9.1-p376/bin/ruby=E2=80=99 (and if I link =
them from
my ~/bin I don=E2=80=99t even need to do any $PATH munging to get them runn=
ing
through a given Ruby binary).

Hence, my conclusion is that if you turned your code into a gem prior
to installing it, you could still keep the =E2=80=98#!/usr/bin/env ruby1.9=
=E2=80=99
hashbang in your repo (and for testing), but once you want to get
a given version into =E2=80=98production=E2=80=99, RubyGems will turn that =
into
=E2=80=98#!/usr/local/bin/ruby1.9=E2=80=99 upon the gem=E2=80=99s installat=
ion.

=E2=80=94 Shot
--=20
I should like to find the person who decided that since
=E2=80=98bookmarks=E2=80=99 and =E2=80=98history=E2=80=99 were both lists o=
f URLs they
ought to be integrated in a single database. I should like
to shake him warmly by the throat until his head comes off.
             [Roger Burton West on Firefox, hates-software]

--Nq2Wo0NMKNjxTN9z
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkskH14ACgkQi/mCfdEo8Ur7IQCgoJZuNRj8yT+ERRcfPgBhtcuO
M38AnRlgEz8p0802CTQV/NCUv4ivPJ8V
=U7ko
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Nq2Wo0NMKNjxTN9z--