G
George Ogata
Hello,
I have two versions of ruby installed, rooted at different source
trees. In order to make them not collide in my $PATH, I simply
configured one with a program-suffix:
EPREFIX1/bin/ruby
EPREFIX2/bin/ruby18
Life was peachy until I installed rubygems. The gems executables all
go in the ruby bindirs (alongside ruby and ruby18), but they ignore
any --program-prefix or --program-suffix. Would it not be a good idea
to have the executables named with the same prefix and suffix as the
ruby executable? I think the shebang lines should also be rewritten
to use the full path to the ruby executable used to run setup.rb.
Of course, this would make it impossible to move the ruby executable
without breaking gems, but I'd kinda expect a few things may break if
you were to pull a stunt like that.
Now, there's no Config::CONFIG['program_suffix'] (or prefix), so it'd
probably be an idea to add these too. But they can also be sucked out
of Config::CONFIG['configure_args'] with Shellwords easily.
What do you think?
I have two versions of ruby installed, rooted at different source
trees. In order to make them not collide in my $PATH, I simply
configured one with a program-suffix:
EPREFIX1/bin/ruby
EPREFIX2/bin/ruby18
Life was peachy until I installed rubygems. The gems executables all
go in the ruby bindirs (alongside ruby and ruby18), but they ignore
any --program-prefix or --program-suffix. Would it not be a good idea
to have the executables named with the same prefix and suffix as the
ruby executable? I think the shebang lines should also be rewritten
to use the full path to the ruby executable used to run setup.rb.
Of course, this would make it impossible to move the ruby executable
without breaking gems, but I'd kinda expect a few things may break if
you were to pull a stunt like that.
Now, there's no Config::CONFIG['program_suffix'] (or prefix), so it'd
probably be an idea to add these too. But they can also be sucked out
of Config::CONFIG['configure_args'] with Shellwords easily.
What do you think?