In message <6b2d1e190510020828y12859cf9ub2fe73c5a3ce32f7@mail.gmail.com>
	on Sun, 2 Oct 2005 17:28:36 +0200,
	"Julio M. Merino Vidal" <jmmv84@gmail.com> wrote:
> > pkg_alternatives is optional tool.
> 
> Yes, it is, based on the request of many users.  However, the framework
> is not optional.  What I mean is that you can first install the ruby packages
> and then, at a later step, add pkg_alternatives; the new 'ruby' name will
> pop up automagically.
I see.  (But I must think consistency for current lang/ruby package
which gives commands without ${RUBY_VER} suffix.)

> > So, I understand it as "another way." and there should be other way
> > (as symlink ${PREFIX}/bin/ruby18 as ${WRKDIR}/.buildlink/bin/ruby or
> > somthing?)
> 
> It is certainly another way, but it was added to homogenize all this stuff
> in pkgsrc, specially targetting users of binary packages.  pkg_alternatives
> provides complete customization of what these users get.  (Is the existing
> 'ruby' package binary friendly?  Or it relies on a specific version given at
> build time?)
Do you mean lang/ruby package?  Yes it depends on specific to
ruby${RUBY_VER}; it creates binary package ruby-${RUBY_VER}nb2.tgz and
user can select to install either of ruby-1.8.2nb2.tgz or
ruby-1.6.8nb2 package.

-- 
Takahiro Kambe <taca@back-street.net>