On Tuesday, November 5, 2002, at 07:24 PM, Damon wrote:

> I am happily running OS 10.2.1 on my Mac, using the default OS X
> installation of Ruby.  I have not installed any packages yet, but will
> be doing so soon.  The fink package manager seems to be a pretty good
> installer, so that's what I'll probably use.  Now, fink installs Ruby
> libaries under /sw/bin and /sw/lib, as opposed to Mac OS X, which
> installs it under /usr/bin and /usr/lib.
>
> Has anyone tried to use OS X's native Ruby, yet have fink install
> libraries in  the /sw directory?  Or is it preferable to simply let
> fink install Ruby over again in /sw, along with additional libraries
> (thus ignoring the native OS X Ruby installation)?  Or is better to
> fiddle with fink, and have fink install Ruby libraries in /usr/lib  as
> oppsoed to /sw?
>
> Opinions please.

I think it's better to let fink do its thing in /sw. This is partly 
because I just like the ability to turn fink off by commenting out one 
line in my .tcshrc file and partly because there were some issues with 
the rbconfig.rb file, if memory serves, that made problems with 
building 3rd party libraries. Letting fink rebuild ruby gives you a 
fresh rbconfig.rb. Finally, fink will import enough X11 stuff to build 
ruby Tcl/Tk. I like to experiment with the alpha but progressing Quartz 
Tcl/Tk. With a fink build in /sw I can play around with X11 Tcl/Tk and 
then switch to Quartz Tcl/Tk.