Re: making Ruby 1.9 default

2011-03-16 Thread Eric
> From: Steve Wills 

[SNIP]

> Ruby 1.9.x has been the "current stable version" of Ruby (according to
> ruby-lang.org) since April 21, 2009 (at least according to my reading of
> the WebBack machine). It seems to me it would be really nice to get Ruby
> 1.9 as the default version by 9.0. Does that seem reasonable to everyone
> else? If so, I'd like to do some work towards making that happen.

[SNIP]

I've personally been a bit snowed under with work recently, but I'm very
happy to help you out where possible on this, generating patches, etc.

> Am I crazy? Barking up the wrong tree, etc? Any input would be appreciated.

No that all sounds very sensible to my mind.  It does seem to be a good idea
to get the Ruby default up to 1.9.x in time for a FreeBSD 9 release, I've no
idea if that is really practical, I vaguely remember reading somewhere that
release was planned for May(ish).

Regards

Eric


___
freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ruby
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ruby-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: making Ruby 1.9 default

2011-03-16 Thread paranormal
This is good idea. But beautiful port portupgrade :),
not work with 1.9 version.

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.

On Tue, 2011-03-15 at 19:01 -0400, Steve Wills wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Ruby 1.9.x has been the "current stable version" of Ruby (according to
> ruby-lang.org) since April 21, 2009 (at least according to my reading of
> the WebBack machine). It seems to me it would be really nice to get Ruby
> 1.9 as the default version by 9.0. Does that seem reasonable to everyone
> else? If so, I'd like to do some work towards making that happen. My
> current thoughts on what a plan would be are:
> 
> * Build all ruby dependent ports - already in progress in my tinderbox
> * Identify ports which don't build with RUBY_VER == 1.9
> * Add the usual lines to prevent them from trying to build with RUBY_VER
> == 1.9:
> 
>   .if ${RUBY_VER} == 1.9
>   BROKEN= does not work with ruby 1.9
>   .endif
> 
> * Try to identify ports which don't build with 1.9 which may have an
> update available which will allow them to build with 1.9 and update
> those. I've already got some updates for the ruby-gnome stuff ready to
> commit.
> 
> * From those that remain, determine if a fix is available or attempt to
> fix them.
> 
> * From those that can't be fixed, determine if they are important enough
> to hold up switching the default. Some I've found have no home page,
> don't seem useful enough to keep in the tree or looks as though they are
> no longer maintained and will not get the changes needed to work with 1.9.
> 
> * Request -exp run with RUBY_DEFAULT_VER?= 1.9 and perhaps repeat the
> process if anything surprising is found.
> 
> Am I crazy? Barking up the wrong tree, etc? Any input would be appreciated.
> 
> Thanks,
> Steve
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (FreeBSD)
> 
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNf+/FAAoJEPXPYrMgexuh6QoH/jMcgArhx6z0/2/RfZRLTu/f
> GnuOusNc1DjAXnxYOPUX1C6GL5XfyxMSEFBKlH/US8j5LvejHoJ1vl/wtnfM39iV
> JK8cZgYpXxFa/Xvxp/5Zh0P7BE1KfPBT1UhpJNy1vxKUfccHhL9Wkp7/S1PHq0K2
> XUmY44TA1CfXgs4neFDqVM/Vbg1aTQpqlvFHtw0ldv7UZgrgHzb/DqFDXYboETz7
> 3GZQvhbUGky91EeO5EaAqLD7pgKI5oNu/pXgxQC+YDm5kuWaCOG2qROK5j8D6pNV
> JTERnKkVEezrOroJn79xRdkURX4KqAGT2sy15epZS62ba+B7g1g3c+0Q8Af1BtI=
> =tKU2
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
> ___
> freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ruby
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ruby-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


___
freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ruby
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ruby-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: making Ruby 1.9 default

2011-03-16 Thread Eric
> From: paranormal 
[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


___
freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ruby
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ruby-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: making Ruby 1.9 default

2011-03-16 Thread milki
On 11:25 Wed 16 Mar , Eric wrote:
> 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've been hanging out at #bsdports@efnet and I've gathered that is the
consensus of committers that portupgrade is no longer maintained and
portmaster is the preferred tool. The docs need some patching to reflect
this.

-- 
milki
___
freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ruby
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ruby-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Ruby Newbie...

2011-03-16 Thread Glenn
Good Day!  I am attempting to install Jobsworth on FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE 
(amd64).  It requires Ruby 1.9.x.


I attempted to install Ruby and applicable gems via the ports 
collection.  Suffice to say that this procedure did not work.  :-)  My 
next step was RTFM...


In following the instructions at https://github.com/ari/jobsworth#readme 
 
, I was able to get much further in the installation process!


I was able to get to Step 5 (Ruby gems).  The only way I could get Step 
5 (Ruby gems) to complete was to run the command as root although the 
instructions wanted the commands run as my Apache user.


When I run Step 6 (Setup configuration and database) and initialize the 
database schema, I get:

Initialize database schema [n]: y
Initializing database schema
(in /usr/local/www/jobsworth)
rake aborted!
no such file to load -- iconv
/usr/local/www/jobsworth/Rakefile:4:in `'
(See full trace by running task with --trace)
(in /usr/local/www/jobsworth)
rake aborted!
no such file to load -- iconv
/usr/local/www/jobsworth/Rakefile:4:in `'
(See full trace by running task with --trace)

Loading Rails to create account...
/usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/json-1.4.6/lib/json/common.rb: 
2:in `require': no such file to load -- iconv (LoadError)
from 
/usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/json-1.4.6/lib/json/common.rb:2:in 
`'
from 
/usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/json-1.4.6/lib/json.rb:1:in 
`require'
from 
/usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/json-1.4.6/lib/json.rb:1:in 
`'
from 
/usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/bundler-1.0.10/lib/bundler/runtime.rb:68:in 
`require'
from 
/usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/bundler-1.0.10/lib/bundler/runtime.rb:68:in 
`block (2 levels) in require'
from 
/usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/bundler-1.0.10/lib/bundler/runtime.rb:66:in 
`each'
from 
/usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/bundler-1.0.10/lib/bundler/runtime.rb:66:in 
`block in require'
from 
/usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/bundler-1.0.10/lib/bundler/runtime.rb:55:in 
`each'
from 
/usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/bundler-1.0.10/lib/bundler/runtime.rb:55:in 
`require'
from 
/usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/bundler-1.0.10/lib/bundler.rb:120:in 
`require'
from /usr/local/www/jobsworth/config/application.rb:7:in `(required)>'

from :29:in `require'
from :29:in `require'
from /usr/local/www/jobsworth/config/environment.rb:2:in `(required)>'

from :29:in `require'
from :29:in `require'
from setup.rb:181:in `'

I have attempted #2 from 
http://exceptionz.wordpress.com/2010/02/03/how-to-fix-the-iconv-requi... 
 


.

I have attempted 
http://blog.dev001.net/post/2436585997/installing-iconv-using-bundler... 



Neither has worked.  I fear I am missing something simple.  Alas, I
have zero Ruby experience prior to this project.  Any assistance would
be greatly appreciated!!!  :-)

Thank You In Advance!

glenn

___
freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ruby
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ruby-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: making Ruby 1.9 default

2011-03-16 Thread Stanislav Sedov
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:00:48 -0700
milki  mentioned:

> On 11:25 Wed 16 Mar , Eric wrote:
> > 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've been hanging out at #bsdports@efnet and I've gathered that is the
> consensus of committers that portupgrade is no longer maintained and
> portmaster is the preferred tool. The docs need some patching to reflect
> this.
> 

It's not true, it's officially maintained by ruby@, which for portupgrade
was effectively mainly me for the past years.  Unfortunately, I don't have
enough resources to make significant changes there.

-- 
Stanislav Sedov
ST4096-RIPE

()  ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail 
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   - against proprietary attachments
___
freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ruby
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ruby-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: Ruby Newbie...

2011-03-16 Thread Stanislav Sedov
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 12:21:29 -0700
Glenn  mentioned:

> Good Day!  I am attempting to install Jobsworth on FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE 
> (amd64).  It requires Ruby 1.9.x.
> 
> I attempted to install Ruby and applicable gems via the ports 
> collection.  Suffice to say that this procedure did not work.  :-)  My 
> next step was RTFM...
> 
> In following the instructions at https://github.com/ari/jobsworth#readme 
>  
> , I was able to get much further in the installation process!
> 
> I was able to get to Step 5 (Ruby gems).  The only way I could get Step 
> 5 (Ruby gems) to complete was to run the command as root although the 
> instructions wanted the commands run as my Apache user.
> 
> When I run Step 6 (Setup configuration and database) and initialize the 
> database schema, I get:
> Initialize database schema [n]: y
> Initializing database schema
> (in /usr/local/www/jobsworth)
> rake aborted!
> no such file to load -- iconv
> /usr/local/www/jobsworth/Rakefile:4:in `'
> (See full trace by running task with --trace)
> (in /usr/local/www/jobsworth)
> rake aborted!
> no such file to load -- iconv
> /usr/local/www/jobsworth/Rakefile:4:in `'
> (See full trace by running task with --trace)
> 
> Loading Rails to create account...
> /usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/json-1.4.6/lib/json/common.rb: 
> 2:in `require': no such file to load -- iconv (LoadError)
>  from 
> /usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/json-1.4.6/lib/json/common.rb:2:in 
> `'
>  from 
> /usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/json-1.4.6/lib/json.rb:1:in 
> `require'
>  from 
> /usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/json-1.4.6/lib/json.rb:1:in 
> `'
>  from 
> /usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/bundler-1.0.10/lib/bundler/runtime.rb:68:in
>  
> `require'
>  from 
> /usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/bundler-1.0.10/lib/bundler/runtime.rb:68:in
>  
> `block (2 levels) in require'
>  from 
> /usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/bundler-1.0.10/lib/bundler/runtime.rb:66:in
>  
> `each'
>  from 
> /usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/bundler-1.0.10/lib/bundler/runtime.rb:66:in
>  
> `block in require'
>  from 
> /usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/bundler-1.0.10/lib/bundler/runtime.rb:55:in
>  
> `each'
>  from 
> /usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/bundler-1.0.10/lib/bundler/runtime.rb:55:in
>  
> `require'
>  from 
> /usr/local/rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p180/gems/bundler-1.0.10/lib/bundler.rb:120:in 
> `require'
>  from /usr/local/www/jobsworth/config/application.rb:7:in ` (required)>'
>  from :29:in `require'
>  from :29:in `require'
>  from /usr/local/www/jobsworth/config/environment.rb:2:in ` (required)>'
>  from :29:in `require'
>  from :29:in `require'
>  from setup.rb:181:in `'
> 
> I have attempted #2 from 
> http://exceptionz.wordpress.com/2010/02/03/how-to-fix-the-iconv-requi... 
> 
>  
> 
> .
> 
> I have attempted 
> http://blog.dev001.net/post/2436585997/installing-iconv-using-bundler... 
> 
> 
> Neither has worked.  I fear I am missing something simple.  Alas, I
> have zero Ruby experience prior to this project.  Any assistance would
> be greatly appreciated!!!  :-)
> 

It seems it missed the iconv library.
Try installing it from converters/ruby-iconv.
Also, if you're using ruby 1.9 set RUBY_VER to 1.9 when installing anything
from ports. (e.g. via make variable, or put RUBY_VER=1.9 to the /etc/make.conf).

-- 
Stanislav Sedov
ST4096-RIPE

()  ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail 
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   - against proprietary attachments
___
freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ruby
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ruby-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: making Ruby 1.9 default

2011-03-16 Thread milki
On 13:42 Wed 16 Mar , Stanislav Sedov wrote:
> > I've been hanging out at #bsdports@efnet and I've gathered that is the
> > consensus of committers that portupgrade is no longer maintained and
> > portmaster is the preferred tool. The docs need some patching to reflect
> > this.
> > 
> 
> It's not true, it's officially maintained by ruby@, which for portupgrade
> was effectively mainly me for the past years.  Unfortunately, I don't have
> enough resources to make significant changes there.

Given that there are so many PRs and I emailed the official maintainer
(ruby@) with a small 2 line patch suggestion and received no feedback,
I'd say its pretty good as not maintained.

--milki
___
freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ruby
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ruby-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: making Ruby 1.9 default

2011-03-16 Thread Steve Wills
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Hi Martin,

On 03/16/11 00:46, Martin Wilke wrote:
> I'd like to say come up with patches, and let see how the result is. If
> it works
> i vote +1 to make it default.

Of course, you are right, the results are all that matter. I just wanted
to ensure I was on the right path before proceeding.

Please take a look at the attached patch. If you have questions about
it, I can explain the reasons behind all the changes. Any testing is of
course very welcome and appreciated.

Thanks,
Steve
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (FreeBSD)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNgXfLAAoJEPXPYrMgexuhIEIH/jr3n8qEMF4H/VrwvwBxrTCq
baeqyi/Gdis03BpFd+m/vc1qE7FS5zpoBFLLu1SXGw7/cFAjDWWKpHvf9qkSfbS/
653vFng2DCTpu74tchrRsA7LGgwEozA+7mgS+H72YpYjt8zfAjgD8NiVmgtydEbn
/HnrINwx02ypNneUGkPrtIRmPGWORxYVCdoFZ7s5senCcbjFpyEUNbZCLoZPl1Ii
YjZNYSJsQo911hyzi5Ycji4Wv8hfE+OdON91ehfGf+Z8P7L1ulry2qDfETWg0KMD
W49CLU1SnGsV9baBgjDeDZqUJhsEXLdrSURRlxMPf8MHe24OImBvl8GHswqv2NQ=
=8fJg
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Index: Mk/bsd.ruby.mk
===
RCS file: /home/ncvs/ports/Mk/bsd.ruby.mk,v
retrieving revision 1.203
diff -u -r1.203 bsd.ruby.mk
--- Mk/bsd.ruby.mk  22 Nov 2010 05:47:07 -  1.203
+++ Mk/bsd.ruby.mk  17 Mar 2011 02:33:39 -
@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@
 # RUBY_ELISPDIR- Installation path for emacs lisp files.
 #
 
-RUBY_DEFAULT_VER?= 1.8
+RUBY_DEFAULT_VER?= 1.9
 RAKE_VER=  0.8.7
 
 RUBY_VER?= ${RUBY_DEFAULT_VER}
@@ -201,7 +201,7 @@
 RUBY_RELVERSION=   1.9.2
 RUBY_PORTREVISION= 0
 RUBY_PORTEPOCH=1
-RUBY_PATCHLEVEL=   0
+RUBY_PATCHLEVEL=   180
 
 RUBY_VERSION?= ${RUBY_RELVERSION}.${RUBY_PATCHLEVEL}
 RUBY_DISTVERSION?= ${RUBY_RELVERSION}-p${RUBY_PATCHLEVEL}
@@ -382,12 +382,10 @@
 #
 .if defined(USE_RUBYGEMS)
 
-. if ${RUBY_VER} == 1.8
 BUILD_DEPENDS+=${RUBYGEMBIN}:${PORTSDIR}/devel/ruby-gems
-RUN_DEPENDS+=  ${BUILD_DEPENDS}
-. endif
+RUN_DEPENDS+=  ${RUBYGEMBIN}:${PORTSDIR}/devel/ruby-gems
 
-PKGNAMEPREFIX?=rubygem-
+PKGNAMEPREFIX?=rubygem${RUBY_SUFFIX}-
 EXTRACT_SUFX=  .gem
 EXTRACT_ONLY=
 DIST_SUBDIR=   rubygem
Index: lang/ruby19/Makefile
===
RCS file: /home/ncvs/ports/lang/ruby19/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.10
diff -u -r1.10 Makefile
--- lang/ruby19/Makefile4 Dec 2010 07:32:24 -   1.10
+++ lang/ruby19/Makefile16 Mar 2011 22:39:02 -
@@ -86,10 +86,7 @@
 PLIST_SUB+=IF_DEFAULT="@comment "
 .endif
 
-GEMS_DIR=  ${PREFIX}/lib/ruby/gems/${RUBY_VER}
-PLIST_SUB+=GEMS_DIR="lib/ruby/gems/${RUBY_VER}"
-
-INSTALLED_SCRIPTS= irb erb rdoc ri ruby testrb rake gem
+INSTALLED_SCRIPTS= irb erb rdoc ri ruby testrb
 
 EXTSAMPLES=bigdecimal/sample/*.rb  \
curses/hello.rb \
@@ -104,7 +101,7 @@
syslog/syslog.txt
 
 MAN1=  ${RUBY_NAME}.1 erb${RUBY_SUFFIX}.1  irb${RUBY_SUFFIX}.1 \
-   rake${RUBY_SUFFIX}.1 ri${RUBY_SUFFIX}.1
+   ri${RUBY_SUFFIX}.1
 
 # Macros to change variables in rbconfig.rb
 RB_SET_CONF_VAR=${SH} -c '${REINPLACE_CMD} -E -e 
"s,(CONFIG\[\"$$0\"\][[:space:]]*=[[:space:]]*)(\(?)(.*)(\)?),\1\2$$1\4," 
${WRKSRC}/rbconfig.rb' --
@@ -136,6 +133,17 @@
${MV} ${BUILD_WRKSRC}/ext/${d} ${WRKDIR}/
 .endfor
 
+# we get ruby-gems from ports
+.for d in bin/gem doc/rubygems lib/rubygems test/rubygems \
+   lib/rubygems.rb lib/ubygems.rb gem_prelude.rb
+   ${RM} -rf ${BUILD_WRKSRC}/${d}
+.endfor
+
+# we get rake from ports
+.for d in bin/rake doc/rake lib/rake test/rake man/rake.1 lib/rake.rb
+   ${RM} -rf ${BUILD_WRKSRC}/${d}
+.endfor
+
 post-build:
 #
 # Hack to allow modules to be installed into separate PREFIX and/or under user
@@ -161,10 +169,6 @@
${TOUCH} ${RUBY_DOCDIR}/.keep_me
${TOUCH} ${RUBY_SITEARCHLIBDIR}/.keep_me
${TOUCH} ${RUBY_VENDORARCHLIBDIR}/.keep_me
-.for D in cache doc gems
-   ${MKDIR} ${GEMS_DIR}/${D}
-   ${TOUCH} ${GEMS_DIR}/${D}/.keep_me
-.endfor
 
 post-install:
 #
@@ -216,13 +220,6 @@
 #
 # Add generated doxygen files to pkg-plist
 #
-.if defined(WITH_RDOC) && !defined(NOPORTDOCS)
-   @${FIND} -ds ${RUBY_DOCDIR}/capi ! -type d | \
-   ${SED} 's,^${PREFIX}/,,' >> ${TMPPLIST}
-   @${FIND} -ds ${RUBY_DOCDIR}/capi -type d | \
-   ${SED} -E -e 's,^${PREFIX}/,@dirrm ,' >> ${TMPPLIST}
-.endif
-
@${ECHO_CMD} "@unexec rmdir %D/${RUBY_SITERIDIR:S,^${PREFIX}/,,} 
2>/dev/null || true" >> ${TMPPLIST}
@${ECHO_CMD} "@unexec rmdir %D/${RUBY_RIDIR:S,^${PREFIX}/,,} 
2>/dev/null || true" >> ${TMPPLIST}
@${ECHO_CMD} "@unexec rmdir %D/share/ri/${RUBY_VER} 2>/dev/null || 
true" >> ${TMPPLIST}
@@ -252,12 +249,10 @@
 #
 # Vendor and site libs
 #
-   @${FIND} -Eds ${RUBY_DOCDIR}/ ! -type d ! -name .keep_me \
-   ! -regex "${RUBY_DOCDIR}/capi/

Re: making Ruby 1.9 default

2011-03-16 Thread Steve Wills
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 03/16/11 22:54, Steve Wills wrote:
> Hi Martin,
> 
> On 03/16/11 00:46, Martin Wilke wrote:
>> I'd like to say come up with patches, and let see how the result is. If
>> it works
>> i vote +1 to make it default.
> 
> Of course, you are right, the results are all that matter. I just wanted
> to ensure I was on the right path before proceeding.
> 
> Please take a look at the attached patch. If you have questions about
> it, I can explain the reasons behind all the changes. Any testing is of
> course very welcome and appreciated.

Sorry, I got a little overzealous fixing things there and tried to do
too much. Please see attached instead.

Steve
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (FreeBSD)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNgXzMAAoJEPXPYrMgexuhYXEIAJu1/7vZkF/5F2NE68YBskXl
IhoZXDONwvpEbcVaRFsxzhgxS1hpWU5Ell0V07CUY5ECPMfTvJRroSmsWyRb/8eO
wa6LYWXIuQZ802q8ZdrtcApamhWBXAPKITFopAzgJ34wRPJb9uvfXCYAiSjfLEB7
BVOXVQBtuBCUlN+Gli826xmeO0Z7o8Ow5HXXR73YiNewMmeRbcA3UGo/rpaqsvzA
oblc6KEhtmBwns36sLNnSj1wOm58cNaQXA8DT+boj/Hmd020U9g5oOGmAXnUTwf6
4POoeV0GfKfVvRV1TY31O07RMCq2A8+joyhQBHgt19LWoP4dDH5QA3VJ5B+Fih0=
=jHm4
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Index: Mk/bsd.ruby.mk
===
RCS file: /home/ncvs/ports/Mk/bsd.ruby.mk,v
retrieving revision 1.203
diff -u -r1.203 bsd.ruby.mk
--- Mk/bsd.ruby.mk  22 Nov 2010 05:47:07 -  1.203
+++ Mk/bsd.ruby.mk  17 Mar 2011 02:58:39 -
@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@
 # RUBY_ELISPDIR- Installation path for emacs lisp files.
 #
 
-RUBY_DEFAULT_VER?= 1.8
+RUBY_DEFAULT_VER?= 1.9
 RAKE_VER=  0.8.7
 
 RUBY_VER?= ${RUBY_DEFAULT_VER}
@@ -201,7 +201,7 @@
 RUBY_RELVERSION=   1.9.2
 RUBY_PORTREVISION= 0
 RUBY_PORTEPOCH=1
-RUBY_PATCHLEVEL=   0
+RUBY_PATCHLEVEL=   180
 
 RUBY_VERSION?= ${RUBY_RELVERSION}.${RUBY_PATCHLEVEL}
 RUBY_DISTVERSION?= ${RUBY_RELVERSION}-p${RUBY_PATCHLEVEL}
@@ -382,10 +382,8 @@
 #
 .if defined(USE_RUBYGEMS)
 
-. if ${RUBY_VER} == 1.8
 BUILD_DEPENDS+=${RUBYGEMBIN}:${PORTSDIR}/devel/ruby-gems
-RUN_DEPENDS+=  ${BUILD_DEPENDS}
-. endif
+RUN_DEPENDS+=  ${RUBYGEMBIN}:${PORTSDIR}/devel/ruby-gems
 
 PKGNAMEPREFIX?=rubygem-
 EXTRACT_SUFX=  .gem
Index: lang/ruby19/Makefile
===
RCS file: /home/ncvs/ports/lang/ruby19/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.10
diff -u -r1.10 Makefile
--- lang/ruby19/Makefile4 Dec 2010 07:32:24 -   1.10
+++ lang/ruby19/Makefile16 Mar 2011 22:39:02 -
@@ -86,10 +86,7 @@
 PLIST_SUB+=IF_DEFAULT="@comment "
 .endif
 
-GEMS_DIR=  ${PREFIX}/lib/ruby/gems/${RUBY_VER}
-PLIST_SUB+=GEMS_DIR="lib/ruby/gems/${RUBY_VER}"
-
-INSTALLED_SCRIPTS= irb erb rdoc ri ruby testrb rake gem
+INSTALLED_SCRIPTS= irb erb rdoc ri ruby testrb
 
 EXTSAMPLES=bigdecimal/sample/*.rb  \
curses/hello.rb \
@@ -104,7 +101,7 @@
syslog/syslog.txt
 
 MAN1=  ${RUBY_NAME}.1 erb${RUBY_SUFFIX}.1  irb${RUBY_SUFFIX}.1 \
-   rake${RUBY_SUFFIX}.1 ri${RUBY_SUFFIX}.1
+   ri${RUBY_SUFFIX}.1
 
 # Macros to change variables in rbconfig.rb
 RB_SET_CONF_VAR=${SH} -c '${REINPLACE_CMD} -E -e 
"s,(CONFIG\[\"$$0\"\][[:space:]]*=[[:space:]]*)(\(?)(.*)(\)?),\1\2$$1\4," 
${WRKSRC}/rbconfig.rb' --
@@ -136,6 +133,17 @@
${MV} ${BUILD_WRKSRC}/ext/${d} ${WRKDIR}/
 .endfor
 
+# we get ruby-gems from ports
+.for d in bin/gem doc/rubygems lib/rubygems test/rubygems \
+   lib/rubygems.rb lib/ubygems.rb gem_prelude.rb
+   ${RM} -rf ${BUILD_WRKSRC}/${d}
+.endfor
+
+# we get rake from ports
+.for d in bin/rake doc/rake lib/rake test/rake man/rake.1 lib/rake.rb
+   ${RM} -rf ${BUILD_WRKSRC}/${d}
+.endfor
+
 post-build:
 #
 # Hack to allow modules to be installed into separate PREFIX and/or under user
@@ -161,10 +169,6 @@
${TOUCH} ${RUBY_DOCDIR}/.keep_me
${TOUCH} ${RUBY_SITEARCHLIBDIR}/.keep_me
${TOUCH} ${RUBY_VENDORARCHLIBDIR}/.keep_me
-.for D in cache doc gems
-   ${MKDIR} ${GEMS_DIR}/${D}
-   ${TOUCH} ${GEMS_DIR}/${D}/.keep_me
-.endfor
 
 post-install:
 #
@@ -216,13 +220,6 @@
 #
 # Add generated doxygen files to pkg-plist
 #
-.if defined(WITH_RDOC) && !defined(NOPORTDOCS)
-   @${FIND} -ds ${RUBY_DOCDIR}/capi ! -type d | \
-   ${SED} 's,^${PREFIX}/,,' >> ${TMPPLIST}
-   @${FIND} -ds ${RUBY_DOCDIR}/capi -type d | \
-   ${SED} -E -e 's,^${PREFIX}/,@dirrm ,' >> ${TMPPLIST}
-.endif
-
@${ECHO_CMD} "@unexec rmdir %D/${RUBY_SITERIDIR:S,^${PREFIX}/,,} 
2>/dev/null || true" >> ${TMPPLIST}
@${ECHO_CMD} "@unexec rmdir %D/${RUBY_RIDIR:S,^${PREFIX}/,,} 
2>/dev/null || true" >> ${TMPPLIST}
@${ECHO_CMD} "@unexec rmdir %D/share/ri/${RUBY_VER} 2>/dev/null || 
true" >> ${TMPPLIST}
@@ -252,12 +249,10 @@
 #
 # Vendor and site libs
 #
-   @${FIND} -Eds ${RUBY_DOCDIR}/

Re: making Ruby 1.9 default

2011-03-16 Thread Stanislav Sedov
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 19:31:36 -0700
milki  mentioned:

> On 13:42 Wed 16 Mar , Stanislav Sedov wrote:
> > > I've been hanging out at #bsdports@efnet and I've gathered that is the
> > > consensus of committers that portupgrade is no longer maintained and
> > > portmaster is the preferred tool. The docs need some patching to reflect
> > > this.
> > > 
> > 
> > It's not true, it's officially maintained by ruby@, which for portupgrade
> > was effectively mainly me for the past years.  Unfortunately, I don't have
> > enough resources to make significant changes there.
> 
> Given that there are so many PRs and I emailed the official maintainer
> (ruby@) with a small 2 line patch suggestion and received no feedback,
> I'd say its pretty good as not maintained.

Well, I just wanted to point out that officially it's maintained (at least
I try to keep it working).  The quality of maintainership is another question,
and I agree that it's not acceptable.

Unfortunately, none else stepped in to provide a mainteinership level of
support after sem@ resigned.  It certainly need a lot of love and care.

-- 
Stanislav Sedov
ST4096-RIPE

()  ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail 
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   - against proprietary attachments
___
freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ruby
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ruby-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"