# 1.9.1-p376 vs. 1.9.1-p378 **URL:** \ **Category:** Ruby\ **Created:** [May 31, 2010, 2:50pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/1-9-1-p376-vs-1-9-1-p378/189409 "2010-05-31T14:50:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![jeremyheiler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/34f0e0/32.png) [@jeremyheiler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/jeremyheiler)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2010, 2:50pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/1-9-1-p376-vs-1-9-1-p378/189409/1 "2010-05-31T14:50:29Z")
I just noticed that both [Ruby Programming Language](http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/) and [Download Ruby](http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/downloads/) advertise 1.9.1-p376, but ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/1.9/ also contains ruby-1.9.1-p378 as well? Which is preferred? Regards, Jeremy H. ---
**Author:** ![jeremyheiler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/34f0e0/32.png) [@jeremyheiler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/jeremyheiler)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2010, 3:43pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/1-9-1-p376-vs-1-9-1-p378/189409/2 "2010-05-31T15:43:20Z")
Jeremy H. wrote: > I just noticed that both [Ruby Programming Language](http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/) and > [Download Ruby](http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/downloads/) advertise 1.9.1-p376, but > ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/1.9/ also contains ruby-1.9.1-p378 as > well? Which is preferred? > > Regards, > > Jeremy H. p376 is the advertised as the stable release, but I’ve been running p378 for some time now and don’t have any problems with it. I can’t seem to locate a changelog about what changed specifically between those 2. Dimitri De Frenne ---
**Author:** ![jeremyheiler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/34f0e0/32.png) [@jeremyheiler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/jeremyheiler)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2010, 4:32pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/1-9-1-p376-vs-1-9-1-p378/189409/3 "2010-05-31T16:32:56Z")
2010/5/31 Dimitri De Frenne [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid): > Jeremy H. wrote: > > > I just noticed that both [Ruby Programming Language](http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/) and > > [Download Ruby](http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/downloads/) advertise 1.9.1-p376, but > > ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/1.9/ also contains ruby-1.9.1-p378 as > > well? Which is preferred? > p376 is the advertised as the stable release, but I’ve been running p378 > for some time now and don’t have any problems with it. I can’t seem to > locate a changelog about what changed specifically between those 2. You can search for issues at [Issues - Backport191 - Ruby Issue Tracking System](http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby-191/issues) with filter on status=closed && “ruby -v” contains “ruby 1.9.1p378”. I find 13 bugs among them some segfaults. Kind regards robert ---
**Author:** ![jeremyheiler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/34f0e0/32.png) [@jeremyheiler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/jeremyheiler)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2010, 5:12pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/1-9-1-p376-vs-1-9-1-p378/189409/4 "2010-05-31T17:12:34Z")
Robert K. wrote: > 2010/5/31 Dimitri De Frenne [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid): > > > Jeremy H. wrote: > > > > > I just noticed that both [Ruby Programming Language](http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/) and > > > [Download Ruby](http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/downloads/) advertise 1.9.1-p376, but > > > ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/1.9/ also contains ruby-1.9.1-p378 as > > > well? �Which is preferred? > > > p376 is the advertised as the stable release, but I’ve been running p378 > > for some time now and don’t have any problems with it. I can’t seem to > > locate a changelog about what changed specifically between those 2. > > You can search for issues at > [Issues - Backport191 - Ruby Issue Tracking System](http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby-191/issues) with filter on > status=closed && “ruby -v” contains “ruby 1.9.1p378”. I find 13 bugs > among them some segfaults. > > Kind regards > > robert Ah, thanks :). Dimitri De Frenne ---
**Author:** ![jeremyheiler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/34f0e0/32.png) [@jeremyheiler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/jeremyheiler)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2010, 4:52pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/1-9-1-p376-vs-1-9-1-p378/189409/5 "2010-05-31T16:52:50Z")
On May 31, 2010, at 7:50 AM, Jeremy H. wrote: > I just noticed that both [Ruby Programming Language](http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/) and > [Download Ruby](http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/downloads/) advertise 1.9.1-p376, but > ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/1.9/ also contains ruby-1.9.1-p378 as > well? Which is preferred? 378 is preferred. The page was just out-of-date. I’ve updated it. James Edward G. II ---
**Author:** ![jeremyheiler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/34f0e0/32.png) [@jeremyheiler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/jeremyheiler)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2010, 7:20pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/1-9-1-p376-vs-1-9-1-p378/189409/6 "2010-05-31T19:20:57Z")
On 2010-05-31, James Edward G. II [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > On May 31, 2010, at 7:50 AM, Jeremy H. wrote: > > > I just noticed that both [Ruby Programming Language](http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/) and > > [Download Ruby](http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/downloads/) advertise 1.9.1-p376, but > > ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/1.9/ also contains ruby-1.9.1-p378 > > as well? Which is preferred? > > 378 is preferred. The page was just out-of-date. I’ve updated it. Thanks for clearing that up James! Mind you, it’s still a little confusing that the “Other News” section on [Ruby Programming Language](http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/) only mentions -p376 . Maybe an item about -p378 could be added there? Regards, Jeremy H. ---
**Author:** ![jeremyheiler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/34f0e0/32.png) [@jeremyheiler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/jeremyheiler)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2010, 8:37am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/1-9-1-p376-vs-1-9-1-p378/189409/7 "2010-06-01T08:37:00Z")
On 2010-06-01, James Edward G. II [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > could be working on Ruby. > No problem with that. I was really asking for a pony there! > In general though, point releases should just contain bug fixes. > Given that, bigger is better is a good rule-of-thumb. Thanks again James. Regards, Jeremy H. ---
**Author:** ![jeremyheiler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/34f0e0/32.png) [@jeremyheiler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/jeremyheiler)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2010, 2:25am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/1-9-1-p376-vs-1-9-1-p378/189409/8 "2010-06-01T02:25:55Z")
On May 31, 2010, at 12:20 PM, Jeremy H. wrote: > Thanks for clearing that up James! Mind you, it’s still a little > confusing that the “Other News” section on > [Ruby Programming Language](http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/) only mentions -p376 . Maybe an item > about -p378 could be added there? The core team doesn’t always write about every point release, I assume because it’s a bit of work that takes away from the time they could be working on Ruby. In general though, point releases should just contain bug fixes. Given that, bigger is better is a good rule-of-thumb. Hope that helps. James Edward G. II