Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2012 22:14:48 +0200 From: Mel Flynn <rflynn@acsalaska.net> To: Stanislav Sedov <stas@FreeBSD.org> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, Steve Wills <swills@FreeBSD.org>, ruby@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Ruby 1.9 as default Message-ID: <4FD10BB8.2020009@acsalaska.net> In-Reply-To: <20120607123641.7c080c67.stas@FreeBSD.org> References: <4FC96D45.8080904@FreeBSD.org> <4FD0F9E3.1030501@acsalaska.net> <20120607123641.7c080c67.stas@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 7-6-2012 21:36, Stanislav Sedov wrote: > On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 20:58:43 +0200 > Mel Flynn <rflynn@acsalaska.net> mentioned: > >> >> Given issues described with swig 1.x earlier on this list, you may want >> to investigate if swig 1.x should be removed/patched/whatever before >> this sweep. > > Swig 1.x actually works fine with ruby 1.9, I'm using it quite regularly. > SWIG just generate the C source, it does not provide you with include > path. It is a responsibility of the application to find out what the > correct path are. > > You can look at my m4 macro as an example of how to do it properly: > https://github.com/stass/autoconf-macros/blob/master/ax_ruby_ext.m4 Point being, that: a) /usr/local/bin/ruby does not exist and apparently there are some ports that expect it b) if you symlink /usr/local/bin/ruby19 to ruby, that things still don't work for a port I don't think a package that is as widely used as gdal uses broken makefiles, so either: - these are issues with swig as they generate the makefiles (this was my assumption, but your mail tells me it is incorrect) - there are ways used in the wild to obtain ruby build information that no longer work: gmake -f RubyMakefile.mk build -e:1: Use RbConfig instead of obsolete and deprecated Config -- Mel
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4FD10BB8.2020009>