search for: bobnat

Hello, I am trying to install RubyGems on Ubuntu and i''m having trouble. I''ve downloaded rubygems 1.3.1 and when i run the sudo ruby setup.rb command I get the problem mentioned below. I''d really appreciate if someone can help me out. Thanks mkdir -p /usr/local/lib/site_ruby/1.8 mkdir -p /usr/bin install -c -m 0644 rbconfig/datadir.rb

Hi, I''ve installed mongrel to check it out and want to go back to using webrick as default when i type server/script to run my server. How can I do this? I know that I can just type server/script webrick but i''d prefer to have it as default. Thanks -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because

Hi all, I have to develop a Ruby on Rails web application using Ruby 1.8.2. Could you inform me about what are the latest versions of Rails and RubyGems that should work with Ruby 1.8.2. I am also looking for some documentation that covers these versions. What I have found so far is that most of the examples that can be found in internet do not fully work on Ruby 1.8.2 and Rails 1.1.6 since they

Can anyone tell me where I can learn how to read and decipher the logs? I''ve done a few google searches and nothing comes up. Specifically, I just uploaded my first app to a production server and it doesn''t work and I got the following even though it works perfectly fine on my development machine: ctionView::TemplateError (uninitialized constant

Like most, I have a test and a production env. Both are CentOS 5, Ruby 1.8.6, Rails 2.0.2, MySQL 5, and Apache. Both were setup using the same procedure. Except for the hardware (test: Intel, prod: AMD) and memory (test: 512M, prod: 1G), both systems are essentially the same right down to the Rails env. Unfortunately, memory usage is very different for each. The test system has 2 mongrel

When I initially start up my server I have two thin processes running that are only about 200M in size. They slowly creep up a few megs an hour until now a week later they are at 400M and 300M respectively. I realize that my site (http://wlodb.com) has some intensive pages that take a couple seconds to render (most notably http://wlodb.com/compounds ) but I''m wondering if this is