The Mac OS X 10.5.4 update came out yesterday, but it did not update the
installed Ruby to 1.8.7. I thought the idea that this sort of thing
would happen was part of the promise of keeping Ruby in a system library
framework…? m.
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 5:08 PM, matt neuburg [email protected] wrote:
The Mac OS X 10.5.4 update came out yesterday, but it did not update the
installed Ruby to 1.8.7. I thought the idea that this sort of thing
would happen was part of the promise of keeping Ruby in a system library
framework…?
I think that Ruby 1.8.7 breaks so many things (including all versions
of Rails prior to Rails 2.1) that it’s probably for the best that
Apple stuck with Ruby 1.8.6.
Lyle J. wrote:
I think that Ruby 1.8.7 breaks so many things (including all versions
of Rails prior to Rails 2.1) that it’s probably for the best that
Apple stuck with Ruby 1.8.6.
Well, it would be nice to know that they at least patched the security
hole.
(http://www.macnn.com/articles/08/06/20/apple.tech.finds.ruby.hole/)
You really can’t expect the average user to do this themselves…
vince
Lyle J. wrote:
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 5:08 PM, matt neuburg [email protected] wrote:
The Mac OS X 10.5.4 update came out yesterday, but it did not update the
installed Ruby to 1.8.7. I thought the idea that this sort of thing
would happen was part of the promise of keeping Ruby in a system library
framework…?I think that Ruby 1.8.7 breaks so many things (including all versions
of Rails prior to Rails 2.1) that it’s probably for the best that
Apple stuck with Ruby 1.8.6.
well I hope they fixed the nasty bugs found by an apple employee 
another thing that might hold apple back from updating ruby is that
there’s no dtrace patch for 1.8.7 yet…
just my 0,02 cents
On Jul 1, 7:23 pm, Vince A. [email protected] wrote:
Well, it would be nice to know that they at least patched the security
hole.
(http://www.macnn.com/articles/08/06/20/apple.tech.finds.ruby.hole/)
You really can’t expect the average user to do this themselves…
The update is covered at Apple security updates - Apple Support and
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2163.
The first mentions security update 2008-004, which is the second. You
can see a couple of mentions of Ruby in the list.
As other said, 1.8.7 has still some incompatibilities, which is the
main reason why we didn’t upgrade to it.
As for the Ruby changes in 10.5.4, check out
http://ruby.macosforge.org/post/47/
Laurent
Laurent S. [email protected] wrote:
As other said, 1.8.7 has still some incompatibilities, which is the
main reason why we didn’t upgrade to it.As for the Ruby changes in 10.5.4,
check out http://ruby.macosforge.org/post/47/
Thanks, I’ll try. The site seems to be down right now. That there were
changes in REXML is evident… m.
matt neuburg a écrit :
The Mac OS X 10.5.4 update came out yesterday, but it did not update the
installed Ruby to 1.8.7. I thought the idea that this sort of thing
would happen was part of the promise of keeping Ruby in a system library
framework…? m.
You may wish to try MacRuby, it is a MacPort of 1.9, in ObjectiveC,
meaning that Ruby objects are native ObjC object, making the
interoperability as smooth as possible and letting you write Cocoa
application much easier.
J-P