Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 15:38:30 +0000 From: Steve Wills <swills@FreeBSD.org> To: Santiago Pastorino <spastorino@gmail.com> Cc: ruby@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ruby bsd.default-versions.mk DEFAULT_VERSION Message-ID: <20150315153826.GA2814@mouf.net> In-Reply-To: <CAKecwXDJeUdJtECCGQ8YxnfQJKtct5swLj5b8JT0YMjTp90WUg@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAKecwXDJeUdJtECCGQ8YxnfQJKtct5swLj5b8JT0YMjTp90WUg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 12:23:05PM -0300, Santiago Pastorino wrote: > Hey, >=20 > just out of curiosity I wonder why is 2.1 the current default > version. I know that I can change the version by editing > /etc/make.conf but just wondering if you already know of some pain > points of going to 2.2 by default or why that's the current decision. > I'm moving my machine to 2.2 and testing but I tend to think that it > shouldn't be a major pain. There are still a number of ports that don't build or work with 2.2. I'd ha= ve to test again to give you exact numbers, but it was more than a handfull of rubygem- and ruby- ports that didn't build. Also, sysutils/puppet, which is quite important to many users, doesn't support Ruby 2.2 yet (puppet 4.0 wil= l). Breaking puppet by default would be far from ideal. Switching to 2.2 as default locally and testing is encouraged. :) Steve
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20150315153826.GA2814>