Bug 203800 - sitedir should point to /usr/lib/site_ruby and not /usr/lib64/site_ruby
Summary: sitedir should point to /usr/lib/site_ruby and not /usr/lib64/site_ruby
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DEFERRED
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4
Classification: Red Hat
Component: ruby
Version: 4.4
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
: ---
Assignee: Akira TAGOH
QA Contact: BaseOS QE
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2006-08-23 19:45 UTC by Kostas Georgiou
Modified: 2010-06-22 06:41 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-06-22 06:41:33 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Kostas Georgiou 2006-08-23 19:45:08 UTC 
sitedir should point to /usr/lib/site_ruby, as it is it's impossible to have a
ruby noarch rpm.

$ ruby -rrbconfig -e "puts Config::CONFIG['sitedir']"
/usr/lib64/site_ruby
Comment 1 Kostas Georgiou 2006-10-20 12:38:06 UTC 
ping
Comment 2 Matt Hyclak 2006-11-21 21:59:12 UTC 
Seems this was fixed in Fedora (#184199). Any chance this will be fixed in a
future release of RHEL?
Comment 3 Kostas Georgiou 2006-11-21 22:28:54 UTC 
Yes it's already fixed in Fedora so RHEL5 should be OK (I haven't checked yet
though). For RHEL4 I am recompiling the Fedora rpms which solves the problem but
obviously a "supported" fix from RedHat would be nice.
Comment 4 Akira TAGOH 2006-11-22 04:27:12 UTC 
Yes, RHEL5's ruby is exactly the same as FC6's. so that should works as I didn't
get any bugs on FC6 :)
For RHEL4 updates, it's too late to propose an update for RHEL4.5 now. so we'll
propose this for next next update. just FYI.
Comment 6 RHEL Program Management 2008-02-01 19:12:32 UTC 
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for
inclusion, but this component is not scheduled to be updated in
the current Red Hat Enterprise Linux release. If you would like
this request to be reviewed for the next minor release, ask your
support representative to set the next rhel-x.y flag to "?".
Comment 7 Jens Petersen 2010-06-22 06:41:33 UTC 
Closing since looks like this will not get fixed in RHEL4 longlife.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.