[Rubygems-developers] Binary gems or extension source - which and how?
drnicwilliams at gmail.com
Thu May 22 04:22:23 EDT 2008
If there are any lessons to be learned, and things to be added to the newgem
generator I'd love to have them. The original generator for extensions was
an encapsulation of what I had learned at Euruko so it might not be all
Another option is to replace the Hoe block with Echoe (see echoe gem). I
think it has more support for extensions, but again I don't know what that
extra support is :)
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Clifford Heath <clifford.heath at gmail.com>
> On 22/05/2008, at 3:02 PM, Luis Lavena wrote:
>> you mention a bundle file, but then a require 'wbxml.so'?
> Actually there's something in Rubygems that will load a bundle
> even if you require .so - I think it'll also load a DLL on windows
> if you ask for an so... just to make life easier.
> first of you need to remove extensions from your requires, that breaks
>> compatibility since OSX uses 'bundle' and Linux/Windows uses 'so' as
>> extensions for the shared objects.
> I don't think so. Quite a few gems require *.so, and work cross-platform.
> Look at RMagick for example.
> I suggest you take a look at DrNic post about newgem generators
>> related to building C extensions:
> Yes, did that yesterday, he doesn't answer the questions I asked.
> Are you trying to build a native (pre-build) platform specific gem?
> I was... not now. It's what I did in the past with the one-wire gem too,
> especially since Windows users often don't have a C compiler. I still
> haven't learnt how to do that properly, but for now, it's not needed.
> Clifford Heath.
> Rubygems-developers mailing list
> Rubygems-developers at rubyforge.org
Dr Nic Williams
* Learn TextMate for Rails2 -
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Rubygems-developers