I tried installing a bunch of ruby 1.9 stuff on my Ubuntu laptop last night, but my default ruby is still 1.8.7. Anybody know a regular method for setting to 1.9 on Ubuntu? Perhaps this is an Ubuntu question, but presumably the best way is not always the Ubuntu way...???
on 2010-04-30 21:37
On 4/30/2010 1:36 PM, Xeno Campanoli / Eskimo North and Gmail wrote: > I tried installing a bunch of ruby 1.9 stuff on my Ubuntu laptop last > night, but my default ruby is still 1.8.7. Anybody know a regular > method for setting to 1.9 on Ubuntu? Perhaps this is an Ubuntu > question, but presumably the best way is not always the Ubuntu way...??? The Ubuntu way is to run 'sudo update-alternatives --config ruby' and 'sudo update-alternatives --config rubygems', or instead of calling Ruby scripts with 'ruby', call them with 'ruby1.9' when you want them run in 1.9. Another solution that is available is Ruby Version Manager (RVM). I've never used RVM, so I can't say anything for or against it. http://rvm.beginrescueend.com/
on 2010-04-30 22:20
On Apr 30, 2010, at 3:57 PM, Walton Hoops wrote: > never used RVM, so I can't say anything for or against it. > http://rvm.beginrescueend.com/ > Forget Ubuntu's ruby completely. Use RVM, you will save yourself TONS of headache. It's really easy: sudo gem install rvm rvm-install (and follow instructions for .bashrc settings) rvm install 1.9.1 rvm use 1.9.1 --default Now you're completely in the RVM system (which is maintained in ~/.rvm by default) and can trivially switch between a myriad of Ruby implementation. Jason
on 2010-04-30 22:21
Walton Hoops wrote: > never used RVM, so I can't say anything for or against it. > http://rvm.beginrescueend.com/ Or install from source code. I'm not a fan of Ubuntu's packaging of Ruby, though for some apps (such as Amarok) you seem to have to have it. (nice that they have it scriptable by Ruby, stupid that you can't specify *which* ruby you want it to use.) rvm is quite slick and I've been using it on some recent machine builds. -- James Britt www.jamesbritt.com - Playing with Better Toys www.ruby-doc.org - Ruby Help & Documentation www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff www.neurogami.com - Smart application development
on 2010-04-30 22:23
Walton Hoops wrote: > never used RVM, so I can't say anything for or against it. > http://rvm.beginrescueend.com/ > > Thank you. That didn't get me there, but I really appreciate the quick response, and that actually helps me in some other areas. I got this: root@rockhopper:~# update-alternatives --config ruby update-alternatives: error: no alternatives for ruby. root@rockhopper:~# update-alternatives --config rubygems update-alternatives: error: no alternatives for rubygems. root@rockhopper:~# rvm in that guise is not on my apt purvey. I appreciate the suggestions. Perhaps if it's this hard it's better to wait for the OSs to upgrade themselves anyway. I just noticed the CentOS we use is way back to ruby 1.8.5. I sure hope we stop using CentOS soon. It is a dog, and wastes a lot of our time. Debian family stuff has it's problems, but for my work it seems to always come out as superior.
on 2010-04-30 22:37
Jason Roelofs wrote: root@rockhopper:~# gem install rvm ******************************************************************************** In order to setup rvm for your user's environment you must now run rvm-install. rvm-install will be found in your current gems bin directory corresponding to where the gem was installed. rvm-install will install the scripts to your user account and append itself to your profiles in order to inject the proper rvm functions into your shell so that you can manage multiple rubies. ******************************************************************************** Successfully installed rvm-0.1.27 1 gem installed Installing ri documentation for rvm-0.1.27... Installing RDoc documentation for rvm-0.1.27... root@rockhopper:~# rvm install 1.9.1 No command 'rvm' found, but there are 20 similar ones rvm: command not found root@rockhopper:~# which rvm root@rockhopper:~#
on 2010-04-30 22:57
You didn't follow the instructions I gave and the block of text there gave you. rvm-install And there will be some bash commands to add to your .bashrc as well, which rvm-install gives you. Jason
On 4/30/2010 2:36 PM, Xeno Campanoli / Eskimo North and Gmail wrote: > > Installing RDoc documentation for rvm-0.1.27... > root@rockhopper:~# rvm install 1.9.1 > No command 'rvm' found, but there are 20 similar ones > rvm: command not found > root@rockhopper:~# which rvm > root@rockhopper:~# > This is because the location that Debian/Ubuntu's version of rubygems puts gem executable is not in your path by default, one of many problems you avoid if you install from source. I don't recall where Debian dumps them off the top of my head, but I'll check when I get home. That said, I _highly_ recommend installing from source instead of using Ubuntu's version. You avoid several headaches that way.
on 2010-04-30 23:39
Jason Roelofs wrote: Sorry man. The more I play with this thing, the less comfortable I feel about it. If I had time to help with it, I would be glad to. Not today. Sincerely, Xeno
On 4/30/2010 2:22 PM, Xeno Campanoli / Eskimo North and Gmail wrote: >> in 1.9. > I got this: > back to ruby 1.8.5. I sure hope we stop using CentOS soon. It is a > dog, and wastes a lot of our time. Debian family stuff has it's > problems, but for my work it seems to always come out as superior. > Ugh. I just assumed that Ruby would be managed through the alternatives. This is why I run from source. The lazy man's solution to your problem is to simply change the symbolic link 'ruby' in /usr/bin to point to 'ruby1.9' instead of 'ruby1.8' (the same would need to be done for rubygems. Make sense?
on 2010-04-30 23:43
Try 'sudo gem install rvm' This will put the rvm-install in your path. -Jonathan Nielsen
on 2010-04-30 23:46
Walton Hoops wrote: >> corresponding to where the gem was installed. >> Installing ri documentation for rvm-0.1.27... > you avoid if you install from source. I don't recall where Debian dumps > them off the top of my head, but I'll check when I get home. That said, > I _highly_ recommend installing from source instead of using Ubuntu's > version. You avoid several headaches that way. > > Yes, you know in some settings I really want to stay with a simple set of repeatable and well known standards. I need to wait on 1.9 I think until it actually 'comes out' for this project. Thanks again.
On 4/30/2010 3:42 PM, Jonathan Nielsen wrote: > Try 'sudo gem install rvm' > > This will put the rvm-install in your path. > > -Jonathan Nielsen > No it won't, he's installed the Debian version of rubygems, which puts the gem executables in /var/lib/gems/<version>/bin, which is not in the default path. It can, however be added by putting: export PATH=/var/lib/gems/1.8/bin:$PATH at the end of ~./bashrc
on 2010-05-01 00:40
> > No it won't, he's installed the Debian version of rubygems, which puts > the gem executables in /var/lib/gems/<version>/bin, which is not in the > default path. It can, however be added by putting: > > export PATH=/var/lib/gems/1.8/bin:$PATH > at the end of ~./bashrc > Well, that's precisely what I did on mine to install rvm atop Ubuntu's ruby+rubygems, and it put rvm-install in /usr/bin... on Ubuntu 9.10 at least. That's all I use the Ubuntu packaged ruby for - installing rvm so I can mess around with different ruby versions :) -Jonathan Nielsen
on 2010-05-02 05:08
On Sat, 01 May 2010 05:22:17 +0900, Xeno Campanoli / Eskimo North and Gmail wrote: >> run in 1.9. > I got this: > dog, and wastes a lot of our time. Debian family stuff has it's > problems, but for my work it seems to always come out as superior. Ubuntu (and most other distributions) believe in having a default version of the language, so it isn't a matter of guesswork to know which version of Ruby is the default. As such, interpreted language versions aren't managed by the alternatives system. At some time in the future, they'll change the default to 1.9.x (after having a well-planned migration, and an understanding that 1.9.x is the preffered alternative in the community), but in the mean time you need to specify that you want ruby 1.9.1 by using ruby1.9.1 as your shebang, and by typing the version on the command line. (They treat gcc and python similarly. Perl 5's compatibility is so set in stone at this point that it doesn't need alternative versions on the same system, so the current version is always the default.)
Enable email notification
Enable multi-page view