Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2012 00:59:58 -0400 From: Steve Wills <swills@freebsd.org> To: Stanislav Sedov <stas@freebsd.org> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, ruby@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ruby 1.9 as default Message-ID: <05EF24D9-8D8E-4A50-9F33-8580656AD402@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20120601193059.af9201da.stas@FreeBSD.org> References: <4FC96D45.8080904@FreeBSD.org> <20120601193059.af9201da.stas@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jun 1, 2012, at 10:30 PM, Stanislav Sedov wrote: > On Fri, 01 Jun 2012 21:32:53 -0400 > Steve Wills <swills@FreeBSD.org> mentioned: >=20 >> Hi All, >>=20 >> I think we should try to make Ruby 1.9 the default Ruby again and = would >> like to see it done before 9.1 is released. I've submitted a patch = which >> does this and requested and exp-run from portmgr. >>=20 >> I would like to get feedback on this idea. If you have experience = with >> Ruby 1.9 as default, good or bad, please speak up. You can test this = by >> setting RUBY_DEFAULT_VER=3D1.9 in /etc/make.conf or editing = Mk/bsd.ruby.mk >> and setting the same variable there. >>=20 >=20 > I'm not sure it's a good idea. > Ruby 1.9 still has some nasty bugs on FreeBSD, related to the threads = and > fork. That is fork in ruby 1.9 hangs sometimes... Could you give me some more info on this? If I can reproduce it perhaps = I can track it down and solve it. > OTOH, I've been running ruby 1.9 as default on both of my desktops and = have > not seen major problems except this one. Still, it'd be nice for = someone > to fix it first (I remember there were a lot of eager commiters at the = time > I gave up my commit bit). >=20 > The main question is whether the switch to 1.9 will be beneficial for = our > users. Apart from some libraries targeting 1.9 exclusivly now, most = of of > them still work with 1.8 and there're still some that work with 1.8 = only. > Given that most of the ports users mostly care for 3rd party = applications > to work, I'm not sure if the switch to 1.9 will be a win for them... Isn't 1.9 a bit faster than 1.8? And 1.8 doesn't build with clang while = 1.9 does, so we'll at least want to switch it before 10.0 comes out, = IMHO. Also, 1.9 has been the default version from ruby-lang.org for a = long time and the community is making good progress towards moving to = 1.9 over all. I think most things work with 1.9 now, but I could be = wrong. Are there specific apps that you are thinking of that don't work = with 1.9? 1.9 definitely seems to pass all the tests that 1.8 passes and = more. As far as what users of ports want, the point of this mail was to get = them to speak up and voice their opinions. :) BTW, do you use 1.8 or 1.9? Actually, I'm betting you use Rubinius now = that I think about it, no? Steve
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?05EF24D9-8D8E-4A50-9F33-8580656AD402>