Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 7:10 AM, mark <m.roth@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Fedora's Ruby is 'ruby 1.9.3p362 (2012-12-25 revision 38607)
>>> [x86_64-linux]' which is the latest stable version& can be installed
>>> via yum.
>> <snip>
>> Dunno if it'll work on CentOS, but thanks, Phil - this the first
>> actually useful response to *my* issue from ruby people.
>
> But still leaves the question of why a usable version isn't maintained
> for RHEL or CentOS, either in the distro or by the project.
I agree... but if Craig's the maintainer, or representative of the team
doing that, if that's their attitude - we're so great, you should forget
everything else and do it our way - seems as though that would explain it.
Jeez, the first time I was trying out Linux, back in the mid-nineties, and
I'd "only" been programming for about 15 years, mainframes, workstations
and pc's, gcc and most other languages were slackware's idea of a package.
Certainly, when I went back to Linux again, around '98 or '99, with RH 5?
5.2? any language I needed was a package (though, as I recall, COBOL,
should I have wanted it, was a bit more problematical).
Around then, and a few years later, as I've mentioned, every python
sub-release broke a previous one... but they *wanted* their language used,
and easily accessible. This attitude of "we're *so* wonderful, that either
our Brilliance Alone (tm) will force you to do it our way, or you're an
ignorant idiot....
mark, who uses scripting languages cheerfully, but for
*real* production work prefers a real (compiled) language)
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
