[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Common Position on RubyGems, stupid? what about /usr/local/ ?

I think this thread should move to debian-ruby list. My further posts will be debian-ruby only.

If the build-depends are corrects, gem install could be used. (Disallowing any kind of remote access)

But that's a minor issue.

The _REAL_ issue is how to allow local administrator (and local users if possible) to install and consume gems (outside the realm on debian debs).

The debian firefox package allow me to install firefox extension even if those are not pakcaged as deb. Firefox is a framework like ruby (using ecmascript as its language), i don't see why ruby couldn't do it.

A rubygem.deb provided by debian would be installed into


When root type

	gem install gemname

it would install the gem into


When a non-root user type

	gem install gemname

it would install the gem into


rubygems would be patched to support gems installed in multiple directories


I'm experimenting with rubygems-0.8.11.tgz it looks like it will require a patch to support multiple directories.

Jason D. Clinton wrote:
On Wed, 2006-04-19 at 12:33 +0200, Antony Lesuisse wrote:
Reading http://pkg-ruby-extras.alioth.debian.org/rubygems.html was

RubyGems is a solution to a problem that only exists on Windows. The Debian position is the only tenable one. It would otherwise be impossible to install any piece of software which depends on a library which is only distributed in Gems format because the Debian packages would have no way of building and installing the Gems dependancies. Library authors will have to continue package for both Gems (for Windows and MacOSX) and using the well-establish install.rb (for all flavors of Linux) method -- atleast until Windows gets a sane install and versioning system.

Jason D. Clinton <me@jasonclinton.com <mailto:me@jasonclinton.com>>

Reply to: