Prev: how to redirect to a url that is stored inside a variable
Next: Using variables defined in configuration files
From: Joshua Peek on 21 Apr 2010 21:00
On Apr 20, 3:20 pm, Luis Lavena <luislav...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> 2) "Extensions SHOULD be buildable with ruby extconf.rb; make."
> That is not true, there are extension that even using extconf they
> generate Rakefiles, because they depend on mkrf and not mkmf
> That can't be enforced on these developers, if done a lot of project
> could break.
I'd like to see mkrf formally spec'd here. I'm not to familiar with
mkrf or know to many gems using it. Do you still use extconf.rb but
require mkrf instead?
Also, whats your opinion on make + copy vs "make install" with
sitearchdir. Both seem to be compatible with all Makefiles generated
with mkmf. The problem with copying is that you have to manually
extract the target_prefix from the Makefile.
From: Suraj Kurapati on 29 Apr 2010 01:20
Thomas Sawyer wrote:
> Suraj Kurapati wrote:
> Project has since moved to GitHub:
Thanks for the update. For posterity, I suggest
adding a .htaccess to the old RubyForge site thus:
RedirectPermanent / http://rubyworks.github.com/xdg
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
From: Evgeniy Dolzhenko on 5 May 2010 10:24
How the Config.datadir('$projectname') pattern is supposed to be used
during say a development of a gem?
On Apr 20, 11:27 am, Christian Neukirchen <chneukirc...(a)gmail.com>
> earlier this month I wrote up a draft for a specification on how to
> structure Ruby projects. It started athttp://gist.github.com/361451
> and there was lots of discussion there, which I now want to move to
> ruby-talk to gain a larger audience.
> The specification now resides at
> and is generated fromhttp://github.com/chneukirchen/rps.
> Please keep discussion on RPS to this thread, so people which usually
> don't follow ruby-talk can discuss too.
> Thank you,
> Christian Neukirchen <chneukirc...(a)gmail.com> http://chneukirchen.org