# Ruby 1.8.2 install missing mkmf.rb on Red Hat Linux **URL:** \ **Category:** Ruby\ **Created:** [January 19, 2007, 4:29pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-1-8-2-install-missing-mkmf-rb-on-red-hat-linux/82370 "2007-01-19T16:29:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Bill\_McNeill](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/b5e925/32.png) [@Bill\_McNeill](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Bill_McNeill)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2007, 4:29pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-1-8-2-install-missing-mkmf-rb-on-red-hat-linux/82370/1 "2007-01-19T16:29:53Z")
My version of Ruby on Red Hat Linux is missing mkmf.rb. $ irb irb(main):001:0\> require ‘mkmf’ LoadError: no such file to load – mkmf from (irb):1:in `require’ from (irb):1 $ ls /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/mkmf.rb ls: /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/mkmf.rb: No such file or directory I was able to find reference to a similar bug in Ubuntu where the fix was to install a ruby-dev package, but I don’t think that would apply to a Linux distribution. Is mkmf.rb a post-1.8.2 file, or is this a bug? What’s the best fix? Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Bill\_McNeill](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/b5e925/32.png) [@Bill\_McNeill](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Bill_McNeill)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2007, 4:31pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-1-8-2-install-missing-mkmf-rb-on-red-hat-linux/82370/2 "2007-01-19T16:31:01Z")
On Mon, 2007-01-15 at 09:35 +0900, Bill McNeill wrote: > I was able to find reference to a similar bug in Ubuntu where the fix > was to install a ruby-dev package, but I don’t think that would apply > to a Linux distribution. Isn’t Ubuntu a Linux Distro? > Is mkmf.rb a post-1.8.2 file, or is this a bug? > > What’s the best fix? > > Thanks. Which version of RH are you using, and which packaging method are you using to install? Here’s a partial of how Fedora breaks up it’s RPM’s Being that RH and FC are broken from the same branch, this might give you a clue of which packages you need to install. ruby.i386 ruby-devel.i386 ruby-docs.i386 ruby-irb.i386 ruby-libs.i386 ruby-mode.i386 ruby-rdoc.i386 ruby-ri.i386 I wouldn’t worry about filing a bug on this. They made an architectural decision to proceed this way on purpose. They are aware of it being broken up into several units, and a bug report would just be closed out as not a bug. If you personally don’t like it that way, then I would agree with building from source, but a simple package install should get you going. Matt ---
**Author:** ![Bill\_McNeill](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/b5e925/32.png) [@Bill\_McNeill](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Bill_McNeill)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2007, 4:31pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-1-8-2-install-missing-mkmf-rb-on-red-hat-linux/82370/3 "2007-01-19T16:31:05Z")
On Jan 14, 2007, at 17:08, matt wrote: > I wouldn’t worry about filing a bug on this. They made an > architectural > decision to proceed this way on purpose. They are aware of it being > broken up into several units, and a bug report would just be closed > out > as not a bug. No. This is a bug. It causes confusion for people attempting to use Ruby when their installation is broken. People attempting to use Ruby shouldn’t have to post an email to this list to figure out why they can’t do X or Y because some file is missing. About 10% of the bugs filed against RubyGems are because some standard part of Ruby wasn’t installed by some package manager. I shouldn’t have to deal with those, and neither should this list. Breaking up Ruby into pieces is not supported by Ruby’s ‘make install’, so packagers shouldn’t break up Ruby into pieces that Ruby library authors can’t anticipate. – Eric H. - removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid - [http://blog.segment7.net](http://blog.segment7.net) YOU LIT MY GEM ON FIRE! ---
**Author:** ![Bill\_McNeill](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/b5e925/32.png) [@Bill\_McNeill](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Bill_McNeill)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2007, 4:32pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-1-8-2-install-missing-mkmf-rb-on-red-hat-linux/82370/4 "2007-01-19T16:32:02Z")
Ubuntu is a Linux distribution. I meant to say “…would apply to a Red Hat distribution” since Ubuntu is a Debian variant. ---
**Author:** ![Bill\_McNeill](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/b5e925/32.png) [@Bill\_McNeill](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Bill_McNeill)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2007, 10:38pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-1-8-2-install-missing-mkmf-rb-on-red-hat-linux/82370/5 "2007-09-25T22:38:54Z")
On Mon, 2007-01-15 at 11:00 +0900, Eric H. wrote: > It causes confusion for people attempting to use Ruby when their > library authors can’t anticipate. Well, we’ll just have to agree to disagree. It’s a Bikeshed matter,with lots of opinions, but with no real result. Matters like this need to be taken off-line to another mailing list like ruby-BS … but that’s a whole 'nother bikeshed issue on this list. 200-300 messages a day and only 10% make sense… where’s the real shame? ---
**Author:** ![Bill\_McNeill](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/b5e925/32.png) [@Bill\_McNeill](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Bill_McNeill)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2007, 4:31pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-1-8-2-install-missing-mkmf-rb-on-red-hat-linux/82370/6 "2007-01-19T16:31:49Z")
On Jan 14, 2007, at 16:35, Bill McNeill wrote: > I was able to find reference to a similar bug in Ubuntu where the fix > was to install a ruby-dev package, but I don’t think that would apply > to a Linux distribution. > > Is mkmf.rb a post-1.8.2 file, or is this a bug? This is probably due to Red Hat breaking ruby. mkmf.rb has been part of ruby for many years. > What’s the best fix? First file a bug with Red Hat for breaking ruby up into chunks such that you can’t find everything that ships with ruby. Then install ruby from source. – Eric H. - removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid - [http://blog.segment7.net](http://blog.segment7.net) YOU LIT MY GEM ON FIRE!