Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 11:25:42 +0000 From: Eric <freebsdlists-ruby@chillibear.com> To: <ruby@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: making Ruby 1.9 default Message-ID: <C9A64EB6.1DFF2%freebsdlists-ruby@chillibear.com> In-Reply-To: <1300272269.1973.16.camel@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> From: paranormal <akabsd@yandex.ru>
[SNIP]
> This is good idea. But beautiful port portupgrade :),
> not work with 1.9 version.
What about ports/144605 - "[PATCH] Get ports-mgmt/portupgrade to build under
Ruby 1.9.1"
I've not tried it, but does that patch do what it says on the tin?
> I'm ruby programmer and use tags like so:
>
> .if ${.CURDIR:M*/*/rubygem-*}
> RUBY_DEFAULT_VER=1.9
> .endif
>
> .if ${.CURDIR:M*/*/ruby-*}
> RUBY_DEFAULT_VER=1.9
> .endif
>
>
> I think we need update portupgrade before update system ruby.
There are plenty of outstanding PRs regarding portupgrade, which does seem
to suffer from being both loved and unloved (in terms of maintenance). I
personally use it, but am wondering if it's time to switch to Doug's
PortMaster now... However given that portupgrade is often noted in
documentation as almost the default tool for doing upgrades of ports then it
does seem sensible that we should all try our best to fix it.
I personally think we should still aim to get to the default of 1.9 and
aiming for the 9.0 release seems a sensible target to go for, if part of
that process would seem to be getting portupgrade sorted then so be it.
Regards
Eric
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?C9A64EB6.1DFF2%freebsdlists-ruby>