On Aug 19, 2:07=A0pm, Mason Kelsey <masonkel... / gmail.com> wrote:
> [Note: =A0parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]
>
> You wrote,
> "* Adding Ruby to the PATH requires administrative privileges. The
> installer doesn't ask for them to be safely installed into corporate
> environments.
>
> "* It doesn't associate .rb or .rbw files because changes in the
> registry related to file associations ALSO require administrative
> privileges"
>
> I'm puzzled. =A0The download and installation of Ruby 1.8 for me did thos=
e two
> things without any action by me.
> So why cannot 1.9 do it? =A0What changed?
>

First: you downloaded either 186-26 or 186-27 rc2.

Those installers are the previous technology used, which is based in
VC6.

Second: you're running as administrator, that's why it worked.

Other users run under more controlled environments.

Third: Lot of things changed, that's why I pointed you to the FAQ to
better answer your follow up questions in case uncle Google cannot
provide those to you.

--
Luis Lavena