Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458139 --- Comment #12 from Bryan Kearney <bkearney@xxxxxxxxxx> 2008-09-23 09:10:23 EDT --- Thank you for the review! I tested this by removing the link in /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/pam-1.5.2/lib/pam.so and when launching with irb -rubygems I got an error when I attempted to require pam. I then modified the library itself to be pam.so instead of pam.1.5.2.so. This allowed the gem to install.... but also allowed this to work irb -rpam with only the gem install which I believe is incorrect. So, if the usage of the softlink in the gem directory to the arch directory is not allowed then I will look to add a single ruby file which loads up the versioned library. This seems like the best solution of meeting the rpm needs and the gem needs. Any concerns with this approach? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review