I have ruby 1.8.4 and gem 0.8.11 installed on Ubuntu Dapper. Now I wanted to use gem to install rails (as documented in the wiki). That worked fine, but afterwards, the command rails is not found. It seems that the gem install command does not place the binaries in the apropriate directory. The instruction pages at the Rails websites show that one cun simply type "rails" after the gem install, but that does not work here. Is that known/on purpose/a bug? -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Did you apt-get install ruby or compile it yourself? How did you install rubygems? What is the output of which ruby which gem On 10/08/06, Roman Hausner <roman.hausner@gmail.com> wrote:> I have ruby 1.8.4 and gem 0.8.11 installed on Ubuntu Dapper. > Now I wanted to use gem to install rails (as documented in the wiki). > That worked fine, but afterwards, the command rails is not found. > It seems that the gem install command does not place the binaries in the > apropriate directory. > > The instruction pages at the Rails websites show that one cun simply > type "rails" after the gem install, but that does not work here. > > Is that known/on purpose/a bug? > > -- > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >-- http://www.snowblink.co.uk/
I would not use the stock install of ruby on Ubuntu. I would compile from source. I will send you my instructions in another email. There are some specific steps I follow when doing so. On 8/10/06, Roman Hausner <roman.hausner@gmail.com> wrote:> > I have ruby 1.8.4 and gem 0.8.11 installed on Ubuntu Dapper. > Now I wanted to use gem to install rails (as documented in the wiki). > That worked fine, but afterwards, the command rails is not found. > It seems that the gem install command does not place the binaries in the > apropriate directory. > > The instruction pages at the Rails websites show that one cun simply > type "rails" after the gem install, but that does not work here. > > Is that known/on purpose/a bug? > > -- > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://wrath.rubyonrails.org/pipermail/rails/attachments/20060810/c30bcb0f/attachment.html
I forgot to mention that I then download the Rubygems zip file from rubygems.rubyforge.org and run it manually, as well. i.e. extract, then run sudo ruby setup.rb Then I use gem to install rails and all the other fun stuff Cheers, Aaron Kulbe On 8/10/06, Aaron Kulbe <akulbe@gmail.com> wrote:> > You may have done some of this already, so disregard the parts that > already > apply: > > Me personally, I get the latest stable-snapshot, from ruby-lang.org. It > is Ruby 1.8.5. > > Extract the source somewhere. > cd into that directory where you extracted the source. > Edit ext/Setup > uncomment zlib, ssl, readline > > apt-get the following packages: > > build-essential > zlib1g-dev > readline5-dev > ncurses-dev > > and when I install Ruby from source, I want it to go into /usr/bin rather > than /usr/local/bin, so I set > > ./configure --prefix=/usr in the first stage > > then make > > then sudo make install > > > On 8/10/06, Aaron Kulbe <akulbe@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I would not use the stock install of ruby on Ubuntu. I would compile > > from source. I will send you my instructions in another email. There are > > some specific steps I follow when doing so. > > > > > > On 8/10/06, Roman Hausner <roman.hausner@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > I have ruby 1.8.4 and gem 0.8.11 installed on Ubuntu Dapper. > > > Now I wanted to use gem to install rails (as documented in the wiki). > > > That worked fine, but afterwards, the command rails is not found. > > > It seems that the gem install command does not place the binaries in > > > the > > > apropriate directory. > > > > > > The instruction pages at the Rails websites show that one cun simply > > > type "rails" after the gem install, but that does not work here. > > > > > > Is that known/on purpose/a bug? > > > > > > -- > > > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Rails mailing list > > > Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org > > > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails > > > > > > > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://wrath.rubyonrails.org/pipermail/rails/attachments/20060810/608a6e5a/attachment-0001.html
You may have done some of this already, so disregard the parts that already apply: Me personally, I get the latest stable-snapshot, from ruby-lang.org. It is Ruby 1.8.5. Extract the source somewhere. cd into that directory where you extracted the source. Edit ext/Setup uncomment zlib, ssl, readline apt-get the following packages: build-essential zlib1g-dev readline5-dev ncurses-dev and when I install Ruby from source, I want it to go into /usr/bin rather than /usr/local/bin, so I set ./configure --prefix=/usr in the first stage then make then sudo make install On 8/10/06, Aaron Kulbe <akulbe@gmail.com> wrote:> > I would not use the stock install of ruby on Ubuntu. I would compile from > source. I will send you my instructions in another email. There are some > specific steps I follow when doing so. > > > On 8/10/06, Roman Hausner <roman.hausner@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I have ruby 1.8.4 and gem 0.8.11 installed on Ubuntu Dapper. > > Now I wanted to use gem to install rails (as documented in the wiki). > > That worked fine, but afterwards, the command rails is not found. > > It seems that the gem install command does not place the binaries in the > > > > apropriate directory. > > > > The instruction pages at the Rails websites show that one cun simply > > type "rails" after the gem install, but that does not work here. > > > > Is that known/on purpose/a bug? > > > > -- > > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. > > _______________________________________________ > > Rails mailing list > > Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org > > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails > > > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://wrath.rubyonrails.org/pipermail/rails/attachments/20060810/9f7511d0/attachment.html
I run Dapper and I have installed ruby and rails on four different machines simply by doing: sudo apt-get install ruby ri rdoc Then I download the latest rubygems from RubyForge (0.9.0) untar it and run: sudo ruby setup.rb. Then I do a sudo gem install rails --include-dependencies. It works fine. Jamey Cribbs Aaron Kulbe wrote:> I would not use the stock install of ruby on Ubuntu. I would compile > from source. I will send you my instructions in another email. There > are some specific steps I follow when doing so. > > On 8/10/06, *Roman Hausner* <roman.hausner@gmail.com > <mailto:roman.hausner@gmail.com>> wrote: > > I have ruby 1.8.4 and gem 0.8.11 installed on Ubuntu Dapper. > Now I wanted to use gem to install rails (as documented in the wiki). > That worked fine, but afterwards, the command rails is not found. > It seems that the gem install command does not place the binaries > in the > apropriate directory. > > The instruction pages at the Rails websites show that one cun simply > type "rails" after the gem install, but that does not work here. > > Is that known/on purpose/a bug? > > -- > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org <mailto:Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org> > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >Confidentiality Notice: This email message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of this email and any materials contained in any attachments is prohibited. If you receive this message in error, or are not the intended recipient(s), please immediately notify the sender by email and destroy all copies of the original message, including attachments.
Roman Hausner wrote:> I have ruby 1.8.4 and gem 0.8.11 installed on Ubuntu Dapper. > Now I wanted to use gem to install rails (as documented in the wiki). > That worked fine, but afterwards, the command rails is not found. > It seems that the gem install command does not place the binaries in the > apropriate directory. > > The instruction pages at the Rails websites show that one cun simply > type "rails" after the gem install, but that does not work here. > > Is that known/on purpose/a bug?Am I the only one who experiences this problem? Any ideas how I could find out what is going wrong here? It puzzles me that this is obviously supposed to install the binary somewhere where a standard Linux distro expects binaries, but this is obviously not happening in my case ... :( -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Jon Lim wrote:> Did you apt-get install ruby or compile it yourself? > How did you install rubygems? > > What is the output of > which ruby > which gemI installed ruby using apt-get install There is no gem package so I downloaded the distribution and installed it from there (as root). which ruby -> /usr/bin/ruby ruby -v -> ruby 1.8.4 (2005-12-24) [i486-linux] which gem -> /usr/bin/gem gem environment -> - VERSION: 0.8.11 (0.8.11) - INSTALLATION DIRECTORY: /var/lib/gems/1.8 - GEM PATH: - /var/lib/gems/1.8 - REMOTE SOURCES: - http://gems.rubyforge.org As a workaround for now I put /var/lib/gems/1.8/bin in the PATH but that is not really how this should work, is it? -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Aaron Kulbe wrote:> I would not use the stock install of ruby on Ubuntu. I would compile > from > source. I will send you my instructions in another email. There are > some > specific steps I follow when doing so.Just out of curiosity - why? My guideline and indeed interest is to install as much as is reasonably possible from a package -- not the least, because then I can uninstall it if required or update it if there is an update (even get notified by the update manager if the update is critical). So .. why would there be a problem with installing ruby with apt and why would this cause gem to misbihave in the way I described? -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.