From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: by 10.90.87.14 with SMTP id k14cs1200108agb; Tue, 29 Dec 2009 15:58:17 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.224.96.88 with SMTP id g24mr8404609qan.361.1262131096703; Tue, 29 Dec 2009 15:58:16 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from rubyforge.org (rubyforge.org [205.234.109.19]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 27si19661341qyk.123.2009.12.29.15.58.16; Tue, 29 Dec 2009 15:58:16 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of sup-talk-bounces@rubyforge.org designates 205.234.109.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=205.234.109.19; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of sup-talk-bounces@rubyforge.org designates 205.234.109.19 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=sup-talk-bounces@rubyforge.org Received: from rubyforge.org (rubyforge.org [127.0.0.1]) by rubyforge.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 794D61D78876; Tue, 29 Dec 2009 18:58:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from pion.club.cc.cmu.edu (PION.CLUB.CC.cmu.edu [128.237.157.88]) by rubyforge.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AE8318582C2 for ; Tue, 29 Dec 2009 18:58:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from rlane by pion.club.cc.cmu.edu with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NPlwz-0007Bs-2j; Tue, 29 Dec 2009 18:58:05 -0500 From: Rich Lane To: William Morgan In-reply-to: <1262127243-sup-4569@masanjin.net> References: <1262035134-sup-4921@zyrg.net> <1262127243-sup-4569@masanjin.net> Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2009 18:58:05 -0500 Message-Id: <1262127725-sup-1052@zyrg.net> User-Agent: Sup/git Cc: sup-talk Subject: Re: [sup-talk] xapian-full and ncursesw gems X-BeenThere: sup-talk@rubyforge.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: User & developer discussion of Sup List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: sup-talk-bounces@rubyforge.org Errors-To: sup-talk-bounces@rubyforge.org Excerpts from William Morgan's message of Tue Dec 29 18:00:52 -0500 2009: > Reformatted excerpts from Rich Lane's message of 2009-12-28: > > One potential problem with the ncursesw gem is that I've kept source > > compatibility with the old ncurses gem by not renaming the > > files/module. This means they interact badly if both are installed. We > > could change the Sup source to use new ncursesw names, but that's > > annoying and breaks people doing "git pull". Thoughts? > > I think keeping source compatibility is a good idea. The conflict only > happens if both gems are loaded, so Sup can require 'ncursesw', and then > fall back to 'ncurses'. AFAIK rubygems (at least in 1.9.1) works by adding (one version of) all installed gems to the load path. Since I didn't rename any of the ncurses gem files/directories "require 'ncursesw'" won't work - the main file in lib/ is still ncurses.rb. Renaming the files seems like the most logical thing to do so I'll push an update to the gem and send in a Sup patch to try ncursesw first. _______________________________________________ sup-talk mailing list sup-talk@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/sup-talk