>
> With a system like Arch -- which I last experienced with Gentoo -- any
> upgrade
> could potentially break things, which means I have to deal with problems as
> they arise, or I have to not update a lot -- which means more security
> problems.


With a system like Arch -- which is much unlike Gentoo, I've tried that
before I went
to ArchLinux --, I can at any time revert by just using the cached old
package
and running pacman -U /path/to/package
And believe me, I have enough friends running Ubuntu, Kubuntu and what not
and all
of them are afraid to upgrade each time a new big version is released...
I run my updates almost daily and the last package to break something was...
I don't
even remember when that was. Quite a while ago.

1.8.7 is actually not a great release. It breaks things that worked in
> 1.8.6,
> and most people either stay on 1.8.6 or upgrade straight to 1.9.1.
>

I like 1.8.7, tons of new nice features I wouldn't wanna miss for the world
;-)
Coding for 1.8.6 always makes me feel like I got forced to write C again...
And it's way better than 1.8.5 which Michael is now forced to use.

Also, Ruby 1.9.0 is available as a package, but that one needs to be
compiled.
Although the supplied packagebuilds almost always work and are fully
automated.

And there's Ruby 1.9.1 in the testing repository as a packagebuild as well.
AFAIK
it is still in testing as it breaks something in gvim or something like
that. They
want to fix that bug I guess before they put it out there.


> > And Ruby itself as well als RubyGems come as binary packages, meaning you
> > don't have
> > to compile them at all.
>
> Rubygems compiles any C extensions on install. Or are you saying Arch
> packages
> ALL rubygems?
>
>
No, of course not. RubyGems, the _gem install system_, of course.
I install my gems like any normal Rubyist via gem install whatever.
But it has some special gems as packages, e.g. Rake (mainly those needed for
build processes)

Greetz,
k