shouldn't this be centralized, i.e. in ruby.port.mk when setting the
default version?
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Jeremy Evans jeremyeva...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Markus Lude markus.l...@gmx.de wrote:
Hello,
with the update of swig to 2.0.11 it doesn't
On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 6:02 AM, Federico Schwindt fg...@lodoss.net wrote:
shouldn't this be centralized, i.e. in ruby.port.mk when setting the
default version?
That makes sense to me, though I haven't tried it. I'll get it tested in a
bulk and see if there is any fallout.
Thanks,
Jeremy
On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 07:57:05AM -0800, Jeremy Evans wrote:
On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 6:02 AM, Federico Schwindt fg...@lodoss.net wrote:
shouldn't this be centralized, i.e. in ruby.port.mk when setting the
default version?
That makes sense to me, though I haven't tried it. I'll get it
Hello,
with the update of swig to 2.0.11 it doesn't build any more on sparc64.
MODULES lang/ruby uses ruby 2.0 per default now, which doesn't build on
sparc64. Does the new swig need the new ruby or is ruby 1.8 enough?
Regards,
Markus
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Markus Lude markus.l...@gmx.de wrote:
Hello,
with the update of swig to 2.0.11 it doesn't build any more on sparc64.
MODULES lang/ruby uses ruby 2.0 per default now, which doesn't build on
sparc64. Does the new swig need the new ruby or is ruby 1.8 enough?
