I have to say that rails is such a mess right now. Notta working and it
sucks. I would prefer slower build out to failed stuff.
Oniguruma does not work on ruby v1.8.6 and gem install oniguruma fails,
and
compile workarounds fail as well.
Also, ruby v1.8.6 and support for an older rails (v1.1.6) fails which is
required for my project. Used to work fine, but now I get tons of bugs
like
the ‘require_gem’ vs. ‘gem’ and the total failure of REXML (which is
inexplicable).
REXML fails on ruby v1.8.6 due to NoMethodError “private method ‘gsub’
called for true:TrueClass” ??
The newer RubyGems v1.1.1 is a hack-a-mess and seems to break all.
Aaarrrgh I need to do django and move away from this crappery. I really
like ruby but rails not so much.
Then try a different framework maybe?
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 1:18 PM, jOhn [email protected] wrote:
the ‘require_gem’ vs. ‘gem’ and the total failure of REXML (which is
inexplicable).
REXML fails on ruby v1.8.6 due to NoMethodError “private method ‘gsub’
called for true:TrueClass” ??
The newer RubyGems v1.1.1 is a hack-a-mess and seems to break all.
Aaarrrgh I need to do django and move away from this crappery. I really
like ruby but rails not so much.
–
“Hey brother Christian with your high and mighty errand, Your actions
speak
so loud, I can’t hear a word you’re saying.”
-Greg Graffin (Bad Religion)
Did you actually install the oniguruma C library? That’s probably
your first problem.
–Jeremy
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 3:18 PM, jOhn [email protected] wrote:
REXML fails on ruby v1.8.6 due to NoMethodError “private method ‘gsub’
called for true:TrueClass” ??
The newer RubyGems v1.1.1 is a hack-a-mess and seems to break all.
Aaarrrgh I need to do django and move away from this crappery. I really
like ruby but rails not so much.
–
http://jeremymcanally.com/
http://entp.com
Read my books:
Ruby in Practice (Ruby in Practice)
My free Ruby e-book (http://humblelittlerubybook.com/)
Or, my blogs:
http://rubyinpractice.com
On Apr 29, 2008, at 1:18 PM, jOhn wrote:
required for my project. Used to work fine, but now I get tons of
really
like ruby but rails not so much.
It appears that you have updated many many things all at the same
time. My only advice for your problems would be to restore your
development environment to a known good working state, and then
introduce these new packages one by one. If something breaks, it will
be much easier to tell what went wrong. Specifically, it sounds like
you should be sticking with the 0.9.4 version of RubyGems.
Oniguruma works great on Ruby 1.8.6. As Jeremy McAnally said, you
need to install the Oniguruma C library before you can install the
ruby gem.
Good luck straightening out your development environment! It’s always
a bummer when it breaks 
Blessings,
TwP
Aaarrrgh I need to do django and move away from this crappery.
I really like ruby but rails not so much.
Why don’t you just do it? And besides, if I would not like something,
I would not really use it.
This is why I eventually stopped using PHP altogether.
Django sounds like a good idea, so maybe just do it?
No I have a bunch of things to setup and just can’t get any of it to
work.
I have a ruby v1.9 app which uses the onig back-ref stuff, tried to port
it
back to ruby v1.8 and nothing works on ubuntu. All the talk out there
implies its possible but its not AFAIK without re-writing my code and
even
then likely won’t work. Tried the patch ruby v1.8.6 with onig source and
fails.
That stuff is gone though for now as its too hard to do, I’ll just shelf
it.
So on to a rails-v1.1.6 app which fails to work with rubygems v1.1.1 or
ruby
v1.8.6. REXML fails on ruby v1.8.6 and rubygems seems to just mess up
rails
v1.1.6 as well so its kind of a cluster-mess.
I’m tired of non-back-compatibility of rails and ruby. Too much thrash
and
not enuf stash!
Too many loose pieces, you have to seal up your box when you finish
something.
It reminds me of Fedora-Core-4 and video cards!
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 12:36 PM, Jeremy McAnally
[email protected]
Lets try taking a deep breath and describing what’s actually going
wrong. I see nothing here but heated ranting because you can’t figure
out what’s going wrong.
Jason
Ok enough of my rant. I had to clean and clean.
Then install ruby 1.8.4 with rails 1.1.6 and rubygems 0.9.4.
Just note:
REXML is not working with ruby 1.8.6
and rubygems 1.1.1 is not backward compatible
Glen H. wrote:
Then try a different framework maybe?
Exactly.
Try Ramaze or Merb or Sinatra or Wave or Camping or …
–
James B.
http://www.rubyaz.org - Hacking in the Desert
http://www.jamesbritt.com - Playing with Better Toys
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 1:07 PM, jOhn [email protected] wrote:
Ok enough of my rant. I had to clean and clean.
Then install ruby 1.8.4 with rails 1.1.6 and rubygems 0.9.4.
Just note:
REXML is not working with ruby 1.8.6
and rubygems 1.1.1 is not backward compatible
I’m glad you got things working.
What, specifically, failed with rexml and rubygems?
jeremy
On Apr 29, 2008, at 13:07 , jOhn wrote:
REXML is not working with ruby 1.8.6
Seems to be working for the rest of us… but since you refuse to
describe your actual problems, we can’t help. PEBCAK
and rubygems 1.1.1 is not backward compatible
nor is it meant to be. 0.9.x deprecated stuff and 1.x removed it.
YEARS of warnings… this is the natural evolution of software at work
and considered a good thing.
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 12:18 PM, jOhn [email protected] wrote:
I have to say that rails is such a mess right now. Notta working and it
sucks. I would prefer slower build out to failed stuff.
jOhn, you mention a few issues with Ruby, the standard library, and
gems.
Are you running into actual troubles with Rails as well or are you
just generally frustrated with your Rails app?
In any case, bring it up on the rubyonrails-talk mailing list or the
#rubyonrails IRC channel on freenode and folks are sure to lend a
hand.
Best,
jeremy
jOhn wrote:
rubygems 1.1.1 is not backward compatible
Correct, and the way you can easily know this fact is by looking at
the version number: RubyGems uses a “rational” version numbering
policy[1] whereby an increase in first number denotes incompatible
changes. In contrast, an increase in the second number denotes
compatible changes in functionality. And an increase in the third
number denotes no changes in functionality; only the underlying
implementation may have changed.
I personally follow this policy for any gem I release; it is very simple
and logical. And I am glad to see that most Ruby projects follow this
policy as well.
[1] http://rubygems.org/read/chapter/7
On Apr 29, 2008, at 13:07 PM, jOhn wrote:
Ok enough of my rant. I had to clean and clean.
Just note:
[…] rubygems 1.1.1 is not backward compatible
Why would you expect a 1.x release to be fully backwards compatible
with a 0.x release?
If you are referring specifically to #require_gem, it was deprecated
in favor of #gem with RubyGems 0.9.0 which was released late June
2006. The RubyGems maintainers made a Big Deal about the change on
this mailing list at the time.
Rails 1.1.6 was released a couple months later, so perhaps we didn’t
make a Big Enough deal about it, or perhaps the Rails maintainers had
a good reason not to make the switch to #gem (to fit in with their
versioning scheme, insufficient testing, etc.).
Still, I think 18 months of deprecation of a feature before removal is
plenty.
