5 ms·
I'm comparing to macports. I remember a brew update that removed an old version of openssl causing all of my older ruby packages to fail. Now I would definitely
by nicolas_t 6y ago
I'm comparing to macports. I remember a brew update that removed an old version of openssl causing all of my older ruby packages to fail. Now I would definitely not use ruby 1.9.x in production but I sometimes do have to be able to run locally antique codebases that haven't been used in a long time. I was caught off guard because a simple install of an unrelated application with homebrew destroyed a big part of my work flow.
Macports never did this and kept libraries side by side cleanly.
Now, this is from the point of view of a software developer with a specific niche requirement. For normal users, from a security standpoint, it would most likely make sense to remove old versions of openssl.
- cutler 6y agoWhy not just use rbenv with a $HOME/.gem directory. Much simpler as Ruby versions come with their own openssl.
- nicolas_t 6y agoI was using rbenv, but try installing an ancient version of ruby through rbenv, I have never been able to get it to work without having the existing openssl library in my system (not an issue with newer versions)
- cutler 6y agoI think that's because rbenv only introduced bundling openssl libs at a certain point in its history so, yes, if you're going for a really old version fair point.