# Rails on ruby-1.8.7

**URL:** <https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rails-on-ruby-1-8-7/159835>\
**Category:** Rails\
**Created:** [February 9, 2009, 9:37am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rails-on-ruby-1-8-7/159835 "2009-02-09T09:37:36Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 5\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![toy](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/e9bcb4/32.png) [@toy](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/toy)\
**Post date:** [February 9, 2009, 9:37am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rails-on-ruby-1-8-7/159835/1 "2009-02-09T09:37:36Z")

</div>

Download page([http://rubyonrails.org/download](http://rubyonrails.org/download)) tells as follows  
“We recommend Ruby 1.8.7 for use with Rails.”

Which version of RoR is stable(or available) on ruby-1.8.7?  
I want to use rails-2.1.2. but I dont know that is appropriate.

# Im going to run redMine 0.8.0 on Ubuntu 8.10.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![toy](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/e9bcb4/32.png) [@toy](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/toy)\
**Post date:** [February 9, 2009, 9:45am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rails-on-ruby-1-8-7/159835/2 "2009-02-09T09:45:16Z")

</div>

you can run rails up to the latest version using ruby 1.8.7 without  
problems.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![toy](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/e9bcb4/32.png) [@toy](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/toy)\
**Post date:** [February 10, 2009, 9:00am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rails-on-ruby-1-8-7/159835/3 "2009-02-10T09:00:19Z")

</div>

the current stable version (for 1.8) is 1.8.7. that’s all you have to  
know.

but to answer your question:  
of course development is focussing on compatibility with the next  
generation of ruby. 1.8.8 is still to come out later this year (even  
though 1.9.1 has been released). but it’s not experimental or  
anything. 1.8.7 is working fine. with 1.9.1 there are still problems  
with some gems.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![toy](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/e9bcb4/32.png) [@toy](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/toy)\
**Post date:** [February 10, 2009, 8:01am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rails-on-ruby-1-8-7/159835/4 "2009-02-10T08:01:32Z")

</div>

Thanks for answering!  
and please :), one more question.

I looked for ‘1.8.7’ all the time.  
I read ‘1.8.7’ is as pre-release(or experimental-release) for ‘1.9’.

and I found this, in CHANGELOG of rails-2.1.2.

- Ruby 1.9 compatibility. #1689, #10546 [Cheah Chu Yeow, frederico]

Is this the point of the answer?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![toy](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/e9bcb4/32.png) [@toy](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/toy)\
**Post date:** [February 10, 2009, 10:27am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rails-on-ruby-1-8-7/159835/5 "2009-02-10T10:27:56Z")

</div>

On Feb 10, 7:59 am, MaD [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote:

> the current stable version (for 1.8) is 1.8.7. that’s all you have to  
> know.  
> A lot of people still run 1.8.6 - not so long ago 1.8.7 was a bit  
> quirky. Earlier versions of rails wouldn’t quite work with 1.8.7 (I  
> can remember exactly when 1.8.7 compatibility came in, I suspect 2.1).  
> The note in the changelog about ruby 1.9 is a bit misleading. Ruby 1.9  
> was a rapidly moving target at the time. At many points in the past  
> year people have contributed patches that fixed one aspect of  
> compatibility with 1.9 only for a subsequent change in 1.9 to unveil  
> other problems.

Fred