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?