Thank you for responding but changing the web host is not a solution
because I've got many other advantages for that price there is no
provider and I already paid a year of subscription (it's a well known
one) but if I find a solution for this and for running rails on it
becomes the paradise.

Jeremy Bopp wrote in post #1079109:
> On 10/09/2012 07:32 AM, Nathan Ahmed wrote:
>>
>> Hassan is quite correct
>
> While I agree on this point, I suspect that the workaround may actually
> be pretty simple.  More than likely, this is a scenario where the script
> is running as a CGI script.  If so, the only .rb files that need special
> attention are the ones directly executed in that mode by the web server.
>
> It should be sufficient to rename those CGI scripts with a .pl extension
> and ensure that the shebang line is set correctly in each of them to run
> them with a Ruby interpreter.  Files being required in by those scripts
> shouldn't need any extension change since the Ruby interpreter is in
> control of loading them, not the web server.
>
> For the Windows development environment, it should be easy enough to set
> the file association for .pl files to be run by a Ruby interpreter.
> That will allow relatively easy testing of the CGI scripts under Windows
> without renaming them to have the .rb extension.  This is pretty ugly to
> do though and may lead to confusion later if you ever need to install
> Perl interpreter.
>
> All that said, it shouldn't be a difficult matter for the hosting
> provider to modify the web server configuration to allow running .rb
> files as CGI scripts.  If the hosting provider balks at doing so while
> allowing you to hack around and use a Ruby interpreter under the covers,
> you should probably consider carefully if you really want trust with any
> meaningful operation.
>
> Just my $0.02. ;-)
>
> -Jeremy

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