Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 21:29:49 +0300 From: "Andrew Pantyukhin" <infofarmer@FreeBSD.org> To: "Ashley Moran" <work@ashleymoran.me.uk>, "Philip Hallstrom" <freebsd@philip.pjkh.com> Cc: FreeBSD Questions <questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: rubygems in ports Message-ID: <cb5206420610291029g219f91ffn34cab0d470b2c2c6@mail.gmail.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
On 8/25/06, Ashley Moran <work@ashleymoran.me.uk> wrote: > Hi > > 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? It's somewhat like managed code vs. unmanaged code, only there's virtually no overhead. You can use all kinds of software management tools from cpan and gem to rpm and dpkg on FreeBSD. But only with a single solution you have one place to manage all kinds of installed programs. The bottomline is don't use third-party tools unless you really know what you're doing. It's quite an easy way to ruin your system.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?cb5206420610291029g219f91ffn34cab0d470b2c2c6>