Rick Denatale wrote:
> On Nov 20, 2007 12:53 AM, Michael Greenly <mgreenly / gmail.com> wrote:
>> RubyGems has really become the one thing about Ruby I dislike.
>>
> 
> My way of looking a this is the brain-dead packaging of Ruby on debian
> is the one thing about Ubuntu (and Debian based distros) that *I*
> dislike.
> 
> The problems you've experienced, I think, come from trying to mix
> debian packaged ruby with source installed gems.
> 
> When I first started using Ruby on Ubuntu I ran into problems like
> this.  At Andy Hunt's suggestion I installed both Ruby and rubygems
> from source and haven't looked back.
> 
> --
> Rick DeNatale
> 
> My blog on Ruby
> http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/

Hardly... in all package managed systems /usr/lib belongs to the package 
manager.  No other application should ever be mucking around in there. 
This is not something unique to Debian based systems.  It's just that 
Debian users tend to be more more vocal about these policies.

The system package currently in Ubuntu for RubyGems just about gets it 
right.  They most likely should of disabled the 'system' update feature 
so that it wasn't possible to do what I did.

On the other hand if the upstream RubyGems would actually allow for the 
concept that it may live in /usr/lib but not be allowed to manipulate 
anything there it would make life a lot easier.

Now that (according to the release notes) it correctly updates when 
installed to different prefixes I guess I'll try source a source install 
to /usr/local again.

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.