On 05:03 Sun 16 Sep     , M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
> Todd Benson wrote:
> > On 9/15/07, Shot (Piotr Szotkowski) <shot / hot.pl> wrote:
> >> hemant:
> >>
> >>> NOO  _never_ install rubygems from apt tree, its broken.
> >> Why not? I'm using them with great success. They land in /var/lib/gems,
> >> I have /var/lib/gems/1.8/bin in my $PATH and everything works perfectly.
> > 
> > Some get lucky.  I've had nothing but heartache using the apt tree for
> > Ruby.  This comes up pretty often on this list.  I'm kind of at the
> > point now where I think your should do your own build from source.
> > 
> > Todd
> > 
> > 
> 
> It's probably *better* with Gentoo than most other distros and it's
> probably better with Ruby than some other packages with their own
> repositories, but unless the distro (or someone outside) has put a
> significant amount of effort into integration, you're right ... if you
> want to run a bleeding edge Ruby and gems, you should nuke whatever's on
> your distro, if anything, install everything in /usr/local from source
> and from the gem repository, and lie to other packages expecting to see
> /usr/bin/ruby when they install.
> 
> I went through this with R on CentOS 5. It's a big hassle. R is in good
> shape on Debian, but only because there's a developer in the Debian
> community that repackages R and the interfaces to contributed packages.
> I never did get the fonts working in R, and I gave up on it.
> Fortunately, I didn't need to load Ruby or gems on this machine. Or
> stick with production stable tested configurations from the distro.
> 
> 

Symlink should work for any /usr/bin/ruby issues if you install is
locally.

But, on another note, isn't there a way to install gems for Ruby that is
fairly automated but distro-independent?