Daniel Azuma wrote: > Gary Doades wrote: >> I think that the latest rack does not play too nicely with the current >> version of thin. I had the same problem when I updated rack to 1.1.0. >> After uninstalling rack 1.1.0 and reverting back to rack version 1.0.1 >> all worked OK again. > > I ran into this issue as well after installing rack 1.1.0. As noted, > reverting to 1.0.1 seems to work as a workaround. However, the real > cause seems to be that rails 2.3 is declaring that it is not compatible > with rack 1.1.0. Thin itself seems to work fine--- I have a thin-sinatra > app running with rack 1.1.0 with no problems. What appears to happen on > a thin-rails stack is that thin loads rack 1.1.0 as you would expect, > but then rails (specifically actionpack) tries to load an older rack > such as 1.0.1 on top of it. So rubygems cries foul and the app fails to > start. > > I believe this is best seen as an issue with rails, so I opened a ticket > here: > > https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994-ruby-on-rails/tickets/3685-actionpack-235-gem-declares-incompatibility-with-rack-110
I had the same issue and am running Ruby 1.9.1 after updating rack to 1.1.0. I reloaded the rails v2.3.5 gem into the rubygems for my ruby version. cd to rails app thin start works just fine with rack 1.1.0, rails 2.3.5 and thin 1.2.5 evidently a the rails adapter is updated when the rails gems in reinstalled. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
