f



1.9.1-p376 vs. 1.9.1-p378

I just noticed that both http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/ and
http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/downloads/ advertise 1.9.1-p376, but
ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/1.9/ also contains ruby-1.9.1-p378 as
well?  Which is preferred?

Regards,

Jeremy Henty
0
Jeremy
5/31/2010 12:46:04 PM
comp.lang.ruby 48886 articles. 0 followers. Post Follow

7 Replies
634 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 34

Jeremy Henty wrote:
> I just noticed that both http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/ and
> http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/downloads/ advertise 1.9.1-p376, but
> ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/1.9/ also contains ruby-1.9.1-p378 as
> well?  Which is preferred?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Jeremy Henty

p376 is the advertised as the stable release, but I've been running p378 
for some time now and don't have any problems with it. I can't seem to 
locate a changelog about what changed specifically between those 2.

Dimitri De Frenne
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

0
Dimitri
5/31/2010 1:43:22 PM
2010/5/31 Dimitri De Frenne <ddefrenne@gmail.com>:
> Jeremy Henty wrote:
>> I just noticed that both http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/ and
>> http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/downloads/ advertise 1.9.1-p376, but
>> ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/1.9/ also contains ruby-1.9.1-p378 as
>> well? =A0Which is preferred?

> p376 is the advertised as the stable release, but I've been running p378
> for some time now and don't have any problems with it. I can't seem to
> locate a changelog about what changed specifically between those 2.

You can search for issues at
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby-191/issues with filter on
status=3Dclosed && "ruby -v" contains "ruby 1.9.1p378".  I find 13 bugs
among them some segfaults.

Kind regards

robert

--=20
remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end
http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/

0
Robert
5/31/2010 2:32:29 PM
On May 31, 2010, at 7:50 AM, Jeremy Henty wrote:

> I just noticed that both http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/ and
> http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/downloads/ advertise 1.9.1-p376, but
> ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/1.9/ also contains ruby-1.9.1-p378 as
> well?  Which is preferred?

378 is preferred.  The page was just out-of-date.  I've updated it.

James Edward Gray II

0
James
5/31/2010 2:52:14 PM
Robert Klemme wrote:
> 2010/5/31 Dimitri De Frenne <ddefrenne@gmail.com>:
>> Jeremy Henty wrote:
>>> I just noticed that both http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/ and
>>> http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/downloads/ advertise 1.9.1-p376, but
>>> ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/1.9/ also contains ruby-1.9.1-p378 as
>>> well? �Which is preferred?
> 
>> p376 is the advertised as the stable release, but I've been running p378
>> for some time now and don't have any problems with it. I can't seem to
>> locate a changelog about what changed specifically between those 2.
> 
> You can search for issues at
> http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby-191/issues with filter on
> status=closed && "ruby -v" contains "ruby 1.9.1p378".  I find 13 bugs
> among them some segfaults.
> 
> Kind regards
> 
> robert

Ah, thanks :).

Dimitri De Frenne

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

0
Dimitri
5/31/2010 3:12:36 PM
On 2010-05-31, James Edward Gray II <james@graysoftinc.com> wrote:
> On May 31, 2010, at 7:50 AM, Jeremy Henty wrote:
>
>> I just noticed that both http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/ and
>> http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/downloads/ advertise 1.9.1-p376, but
>> ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/1.9/ also contains ruby-1.9.1-p378
>> as well?  Which is preferred?
>
> 378 is preferred.  The page was just out-of-date.  I've updated it.

Thanks for clearing that up James!  Mind you, it's still a little
confusing that the "Other News" section on
http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/ only mentions -p376 .  Maybe an item
about -p378 could be added there?

Regards,

Jeremy Henty
0
Jeremy
5/31/2010 5:16:25 PM
On May 31, 2010, at 12:20 PM, Jeremy Henty wrote:

> On 2010-05-31, James Edward Gray II <james@graysoftinc.com> wrote:
>> On May 31, 2010, at 7:50 AM, Jeremy Henty wrote:
>>=20
>>> I just noticed that both http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/ and
>>> http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/downloads/ advertise 1.9.1-p376, but
>>> ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/1.9/ also contains ruby-1.9.1-p378
>>> as well?  Which is preferred?
>>=20
>> 378 is preferred.  The page was just out-of-date.  I've updated it.
>=20
> Thanks for clearing that up James!  Mind you, it's still a little
> confusing that the "Other News" section on
> http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/ only mentions -p376 .  Maybe an item
> about -p378 could be added there?

The core team doesn't always write about every point release, I assume =
because it's a bit of work that takes away from the time they could be =
working on Ruby.

In general though, point releases should just contain bug fixes.  Given =
that, bigger is better is a good rule-of-thumb.

Hope that helps.

James Edward Gray II=

0
James
6/1/2010 12:25:13 AM
On 2010-06-01, James Edward Gray II <james@graysoftinc.com> wrote:
> On May 31, 2010, at 12:20 PM, Jeremy Henty wrote:
>
>> On 2010-05-31, James Edward Gray II <james@graysoftinc.com> wrote:
>>> On May 31, 2010, at 7:50 AM, Jeremy Henty wrote:
>>> 
>> Mind you, it's still a little confusing that the "Other News"
>> section on http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/ only mentions -p376 .  ...
>
> The core team doesn't always write about every point release, I
> assume because it's a bit of work that takes away from the time they
> could be working on Ruby.

No problem with that.  I was really asking for a pony there!

> In general though, point releases should just contain bug fixes.
> Given that, bigger is better is a good rule-of-thumb.

Thanks again James.

Regards,

Jeremy Henty
0
Jeremy
6/1/2010 6:32:36 AM
Reply: