At 11:16 AM -0600 12/29/07, michael greenly wrote:
I don't really have a problem installing it in different directories
and in fact that's exactly what I have at the moment (it's the only
option)
I describe my current setup in this blog post:
<http://blog.michaelgreenly.com/2007/12/multiple-ruby-version-on-ubuntu.html>
http://blog.michaelgreenly.com/2007/12/multiple-ruby-version-on-ubuntu.html
The one minor shortcoming of this arrangement is that the user has
to know where things are installed and use the full paths when they
want to execute a specific gem. So for example you'd have to type
/opt/ruby/1.9/bin/rails to run that specific version. It works but
it's not a clean solution.
I'm not sure how to make clean and simple.
One difference between my setup and yours is that I have just one
ruby in /usr/local (1.8.6p111) and mine is actually installed there.
My other two major ruby environments (jruby and 1.9) always live in
separate directories with no links from /usr/local.
An element that both simplifies and complicates is that I modify PATH
to put a path to <other_ruby>/bin first when I want to work in JRuby
or 1.9. That allows me to use gem, rake, rails or any other command
that might get installed in bin and it always works. It also means
I've got to keep track of the shells I've modified path in. I almost
never use full paths to execute anything.
I was mostly only asking trying to get a bit of historical
perspective on recent changes? If there was one? I intend on
spending some time learning just what makes gems tick and then
taking a real hard look at how it's being re-packaged on Debian
based systems.
If you haven't seen it check out this thread on ruby-core to get an
idea of some of the issues mixing package-based ruby with
locally-installed additions:
http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/vframe.rb/ruby/ruby-core/12825?12676-13118
_______________________________________________
Rubygems-developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
