> You can install gems from debian packages Something is either a gem or a deb package. A Ruby package installed via apt should not show up as RubyGem and a Ruby package installed via gem should not show up as deb. A cleanly written Ruby program that requires a library doesn't care with which package manager it was installed.
Keep debs and gems separate. They satisfy different needs that cannot be integrated into a single solution. View gem as just some program that happens to write to /usr/local/bin. No deb integration. Nowhere does RubyGems advertise deb integration. That would be an extra (that would IMHO, be more problematic than useful). So why not fix the basics (executables in PATH), before even thinking about extra functionality? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/706603 Title: gem1.9.1 doens't install executables on PATH -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
