Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 11:12:02 -0500 (CDT) From: Philip Hallstrom <freebsd@philip.pjkh.com> To: Ashley Moran <work@ashleymoran.me.uk> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: rubygems in ports Message-ID: <20060825111028.E66544@bravo.pjkh.com> In-Reply-To: <200608251654.39833.work@ashleymoran.me.uk> References: <200608251654.39833.work@ashleymoran.me.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I've been meaning to ask this for a while... what is the motivation for > including individual Ruby gems in ports? It strikes me as unnecessary > duplication, as the gem tool works well on its own, even for gems with C > code. Are there many gems with FreeBSD-specific extensions or dependencies? > > And which is preferable - pure gems or ports+gems? I was just wondering the same thing. I don't think it hurts to have both though... I would assume that the port version has been a little better tested to work with the rest of the ruby world as well as make sure it picks up any c extensions (mysql, gd gems for example that need external libs) automatically... maybe?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060825111028.E66544>