On 08/03/2013 08:59 PM, James McCoy wrote: > Notice how the version number here doesn't match the version number in > the previous command? RbConfig::CONFIG['ruby_version'] reports the API > version, while VERSION/RUBY_VERSION report the release version. > > $ ruby --version > ruby 1.9.3p194 (2012-04-20 revision 35410) [x86_64-linux] > $ ruby -e 'puts ((VERSION rescue RUBY_VERSION))' > 1.9.3 > $ ruby -r rbconfig -e "puts RbConfig::CONFIG['ruby_version']" > 1.9.1 > > What Vim needs to know is the API version, not the release version.
Thanks - that's informative. Would RUBY_VERSION and ruby_version ever differ in their major.minor values? Vim's configure script concatenates the major and minor number to get a single integer (19 or 20 for 1.9.x or 2.0.y), ignoring the third number entirely. If the API and release versions can differ in their major.minor value, then as you say, this patch to use RUBY_VERSION wouldn't work. If there is not another way to query the API version (which I could believe), then it seems that Fedora 19's build of Ruby is broken, since 'ruby_version' is set to an empty string on that platform:: [root@fedora19 ~]# ruby -r rbconfig -e "puts RbConfig::CONFIG['ruby_version']" [root@fedora19 ~]# I'm not very familiar with Ruby, so before I reopen the below Fedora ticket (which the maintainer marked "CLOSED NOTABUG"), would you be able to point me at some official Ruby documentation that requires 'ruby_version' to contain something useful? My searching didn't show anything I could recognize as authoritative. This is the Fedora ticket in question: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=923703 The comment from the maintainer is: """ >From Vít Ondruch 2013-03-20 07:10:25 EDT You are right. That is coming into that place due to "--with-ruby-version=''" configuration option. Since you can specify there any arbitrary string (if I am not mistaken) using that option, I don't think you get what you want. I am going to reject this issue. If you disagree then we can consider upstream report. Also, if you provide me with your use case, we might find some better option. """ I don't understand why Vít talks about an "upstream report", since that makes it seems like something the Ruby project itself would need to address; but if Ruby installations are expected to provide an API version for 'ruby_version' and I can point at some documentation that says so, I'll reopen the Fedora ticket. Thanks for any help, Michael Henry -- -- You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vim_dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
