On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:53:11 +0900, Trevor Wennblom <wenn0029 / tc.umn.edu> wrote:
> And just *what* excuse do the Debian maintainers give for this
> inexcusable mess that they've made of Ruby? With perhaps the exception
> of ruby1.8-examples, ruby1.8-elisp, and *maybe* ruby1.8-dev and
> libruby1.8-dbg (I don't know what's in those), the rest off this stuff
> is part of Ruby's core as defined by Matz. If 'ri' isn't installed
> (not necessarily the data files, because ri represents program
> capabilities, too), then any system without it doesn't actually have
> Ruby.
-dev and -dbg packages make sense to be split out (headers, and debug
symbols if you want gdb backtraces), but i don't see the core
distribution of Python or Perl being broken up into so many bits, so i
have no idea why they've done it.

i.e. core Python package on Debian contains pretty much every module
(readline, zlib, syslog, and so forth) shipping with the standard
Python distribution.

leon