# Site\_ruby **URL:** \ **Category:** Ruby\ **Created:** [November 26, 2006, 2:56am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/site-ruby/77283 "2006-11-26T02:56:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Daniel\_DeLorme](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/d/9d8465/32.png) [@Daniel\_DeLorme](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Daniel_DeLorme)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2006, 2:56am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/site-ruby/77283/1 "2006-11-26T02:56:07Z")
Can anyone explain what the site\_ruby directory is for? Why use that directory instead of /usr/local/lib/ruby/ ? Only rubygems seems to use that directory. ---
**Author:** ![Daniel\_DeLorme](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/d/9d8465/32.png) [@Daniel\_DeLorme](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Daniel_DeLorme)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2006, 4:52am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/site-ruby/77283/2 "2006-11-26T04:52:12Z")
Daniel DeLorme wrote: > Can anyone explain what the site\_ruby directory is for? Why use that directory > instead of /usr/local/lib/ruby/ ? Only rubygems seems to use that directory. Well, that’s a good question. One point is that /usr/local/lib/ruby is where ruby’s standard libs are installed (if local install, otherwise /usr/lib/ruby) it’s really only by the grace of the version folder (1.8) that gems can use this location cleanly. Unfortunately Debian packages completely ignore this distinction and install ruby packages right in there with the standard lib --which makes it impossible to distingusih standard libs from non-standard (not nice). A recent discussion indicated that the the FHS would have us place these files in /usr/share/ruby or /usr/local/share/ruby. And sure enough that’s what Perl does --though it seems wrong to me. I would think /usr/lib/ruby/site and /usr/local/lib/ruby/site, along side gem, would be optimal. T. ---
**Author:** ![Daniel\_DeLorme](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/d/9d8465/32.png) [@Daniel\_DeLorme](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Daniel_DeLorme)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2006, 10:22am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/site-ruby/77283/3 "2006-11-26T10:22:30Z")
On 11/26/06, Trans [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > /usr/lib/ruby) it’s really only by the grace of the version folder > (1.8) that gems can use this location cleanly. Unfortunately Debian > packages completely ignore this distinction and install ruby packages > right in there with the standard lib --which makes it impossible to > distingusih standard libs from non-standard (not nice). Ahh I failed to notice, well I realized that apt-get was not going well with gem, good to know why. That amongst other problems I have posted about recently have driven me to switch from Sarge to Gentoo in our network of routers and firewalls. A recent discussion indicated that the the FHS would have us place > these files in /usr/share/ruby or /usr/local/share/ruby. And sure > enough that’s what Perl does --though it seems wrong to me. I would > think /usr/lib/ruby/site and /usr/local/lib/ruby/site, along side gem, > would be optimal. > > T. I use site\_ruby intensively to put my own libs, I thaught this was its main purpose, was I wrong? Cheers Robert – The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. - George Bernard Shaw ---
**Author:** ![Daniel\_DeLorme](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/d/9d8465/32.png) [@Daniel\_DeLorme](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Daniel_DeLorme)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2006, 11:30pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/site-ruby/77283/4 "2006-11-26T23:30:39Z")
Robert D. wrote: > On 11/26/06, Trans [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > > > /usr/lib/ruby) it’s really only by the grace of the version folder > > (1.8) that gems can use this location cleanly. Unfortunately Debian > > packages completely ignore this distinction and install ruby packages > > right in there with the standard lib --which makes it impossible to > > distingusih standard libs from non-standard (not nice). > > Ahh I failed to notice, well I realized that apt-get was not going well > with > gem, good to know why. > That amongst other problems I have posted about recently have driven me > to > switch from Sarge to Gentoo in our > network of routers and firewalls. It’s possible to mix the two just fine. Install ruby from apt normally. When you install rubygems just use something like: ruby setup.rb --prefix=/usr/local --siteruby=/usr/local/lib/site\_ruby Then add /usr/local/lib/site\_ruby/1.8/gems/bin to the $PATH Everything behaves as expected. I wish there was a way to specifc where rubygems put the executables of gems it installs. then I would just set it to /usr/local/bin and not bother with having to modify $PATH but I haven’t found a way to do that