--Q9Ek/isSwAzDy9siDfq
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

duh! i totally spaced the fact that the compiled libraries would have to
be recompiled for 1.7+ and would thus be installed to the correct
location. silly me! :-)

the pure ruby packages would probably be just fine though, but i might
as well reinstall them too while i'm at it.

-transami



On Fri, 2002-08-30 at 21:00, Rich Kilmer wrote:
> I have found that most modules are straigtforward to build.
> 
> Typically download the source and:
> 
> ruby extconf.rb
> make
> make install
> 
> Even on windows:
> 
> ruby extconf.rb
> nmake
> nmake install
> 
> Assuming you have libraries needed for extension.
> 
> -rich
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Lyle Johnson [mailto:lyle / knology.net] 
> > Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 9:56 PM
> > To: ruby-talk ML
> > Subject: Re: proper upgrade to 1.7.3
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > "Tom Sawyer" <transami / transami.net> wrote in message 
> > news:1030755047.543.36.camel / silver...
> > 
> > > and, one more thing. i don't think these version directories under 
> > > site-ruby are a good idea. why have them? most packages 
> > will work just 
> > > fine from one update to another. and if one does not, shouldn't the 
> > > package maintainer take care of the versioning within the package 
> > > itself? just some thoughts that may make life a easier.
> > 
> > Extension modules built for Ruby 1.6 are almost guaranteed 
> > not to work for Ruby 1.7.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
-- 
~transami

--Q9Ek/isSwAzDy9siDfq
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQA9cDZDITYvPhXYDikRAs6bAJ0Vg1j90inl+R/Xzl+82S7wX+nduwCgtmPI
uTOp6lJm4Qyf85pezAJ5DTEGp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Q9Ek/isSwAzDy9siDfq--