[ruby-talk:00763] Re: site_ruby

On 28 Aug, GOTO Kentaro wrote:
> Hi, 
> 
> Now ruby libraries are installed in under `/usr/local/lib/ruby/1.4'. 
> 
> I'd like to propose that the variable `$:' should include
> `/usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby' because we must copy many site local

Why? It should already be so, or? Letmesee... <klickedi><klackedi> ?!?!?
Damned! :-O You're right! One day my Mr. Hide alter ego have created a
link from `.../ruby/site_ruby' to `.../ruby/1.4/site_ruby'.

But it seems, that it has forgot to told me that fact! :-( Strange, I
was using it, and now I see, that I didn't know how! :-)))

> libraries into site_ruby of new version when new branch is made in the
> current configuration. And, I also want that non-bundled extended
> library installed into /usr/local/lib/ruby/1.4/site_ruby/$(DLLIB)

May I propose to make that to `.../ruby/site_ruby/1.4/$(DLLIB)'.

Then all files which are not bundled with the distribution, would be
under `.../ruby/site_ruby/...'. Following your proposal would mean, that
some of the files are in the site dir, and some in the distribution dir.

I would like to separate distribution concerning files, with the site
concerning ones clearly! :-)

Furthermore may I propose, that `extconf.rb' should creates a Makefile,
which --per default-- install a module in site dir, and all `.so' files
in the concerning version dependend share lib dir?

> because it is not clear which *.so file is non-bundled in genuine
> package.
> 
> What do you think?

Great idea!

> 
> -- gotoken

\cle