Forum: Ruby gem and stubs

Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
Cb48ca5059faf7409a5ab3745a964696?d=identicon&s=25 ara.t.howard (Guest)
on 2005-11-15 22:14
(Received via mailing list)
what's the deal?  does it support them or not?  the docs are confusing
on the
matter, but the latest certainly does not support them by default and
also no
longer accepts the --install-stubs option.

-a
Bfcc9047bea80035a936648dc1912ec4?d=identicon&s=25 gsinclair (Guest)
on 2005-11-17 04:42
(Received via mailing list)
Ara.T.Howard wrote:
> what's the deal?  does it support them or not?  the docs are confusing on the
> matter, but the latest certainly does not support them by default and also no
> longer accepts the --install-stubs option.

Library stubs have been unsupported for ages.  In fact, when you
install RubyGems, it looks for any existing library stubs and removes
them :)

When "require" gained the ability to look for libraries in installed
gems, library stubs were no longer needed or wanted.

Application stubs are a different matter.  If a gem includes any
executables, they are proxied in your "bin" directory whether you like
it or not.  AFAIK, there's no option to control that.

Gavin
Cb48ca5059faf7409a5ab3745a964696?d=identicon&s=25 ara.t.howard (Guest)
on 2005-11-17 05:12
(Received via mailing list)
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Gavin Sinclair wrote:

>
> Ara.T.Howard wrote:
>> what's the deal?  does it support them or not?  the docs are confusing on the
>> matter, but the latest certainly does not support them by default and also no
>> longer accepts the --install-stubs option.
>
> Library stubs have been unsupported for ages.  In fact, when you
> install RubyGems, it looks for any existing library stubs and removes
> them :)

yup.  you are quite right.  i missed that.  they really should be there
as an
option though.  otherwise this doesn't work

   irb -r postgres  # postgres stub is installed

i liked that stubs were totally transparent to user code - they needed
do a
'require "rubygems"'

oh well...

> When "require" gained the ability to look for libraries in installed gems,
> library stubs were no longer needed or wanted.
>
> Application stubs are a different matter.  If a gem includes any
> executables, they are proxied in your "bin" directory whether you like it or
> not.  AFAIK, there's no option to control that.

hmmm.  thanks for the insight.

cheers.

-a
58479f76374a3ba3c69b9804163f39f4?d=identicon&s=25 drbrain (Guest)
on 2005-11-17 19:55
(Received via mailing list)
On Nov 16, 2005, at 7:42 PM, Gavin Sinclair wrote:

>
> When "require" gained the ability to look for libraries in installed
> gems, library stubs were no longer needed or wanted.
>
> Application stubs are a different matter.  If a gem includes any
> executables, they are proxied in your "bin" directory whether you like
> it or not.  AFAIK, there's no option to control that.

$ gem install --help
   Options:
     -v, --version VERSION            Specify version of gem to install
     -l, --local                      Restrict operations to the
LOCAL domain (default)
     -r, --remote                     Restrict operations to the
REMOTE domain
     -b, --both                       Allow LOCAL and REMOTE operations
     -i, --install-dir DIR
     -d, --[no-]rdoc                  Generate RDoc documentation for
the gem on install
     -f, --[no-]force                 Force gem to install, bypassing
dependency checks
     -t, --[no-]test                  Run unit tests prior to
installation
     -w, --[no-]wrappers              Use bin wrappers for executables
                                      Not available on dosish platforms
     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Courtesy the Seattle.rb Rubygems Hackfest
Bfcc9047bea80035a936648dc1912ec4?d=identicon&s=25 gsinclair (Guest)
on 2005-11-18 01:55
(Received via mailing list)
Ara.T.Howard wrote:
>
> > Library stubs have been unsupported for ages.  In fact, when you
> > install RubyGems, it looks for any existing library stubs and removes
> > them :)
>
> yup.  you are quite right.  i missed that.  they really should be there as an
> option though.  otherwise this doesn't work
>
>    irb -r postgres  # postgres stub is installed

Yes, that's the benefit, but it's a shallow convenience, at the cost of
spewing crap in the filesystem.

Why not:

  alias irb="irb -r rubygems"

?

Or a special alias for a postgres-enabled irb if that's something you
use often.

Gavin
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.