I second RVM, and I would also recommend using bundler on any ruby project
that has gem dependencies.  Bundler can manage the gem path for a given
project, which makes deployment easy and eliminates version issues.

--Dan

On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Kevin Ball <[email protected]> wrote:

> Honestly, use RVM.  Without it, managing multiple versions of ruby is a
> pain, error-prone, and detail filled.  With it, it is a breeze.
>
> -Kevin
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Glenn Little <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> By using one version of ruby and one version of rails at any given
>> time, I've been able to remain blissfully ignorant regarding how the
>> various version of ruby/rubygems/rails do and do not work together.
>> But I'd like to better understand this.  I've been doing some reading,
>> but remain confused about a couple of things.
>>
>> Barring any package/version management meta-tools, here's what I think
>> I've got:
>>
>> + multiple versions of rails can co-exist, and you control which one
>> you use with RAILS_GEM_VERSION in one of the environment files
>>
>> + rails is "installed" into a particular version of ruby, since each
>> ruby install has its own set of gems
>>
>> + which ruby you use is determined by your environment or the install
>> path as usual for unix programs
>>
>> Assuming the above is correct, my confusion I think is mostly about
>> rubygems, and what happens if you have multiple ruby versions
>> installed.  I think it gets associated with a particular ruby install
>> when you run "ruby setup.rb", is that correct?  So when you run gem
>> commands, they default to acting on and with the ruby used by the
>> above command?
>>
>> If you have multiple ruby installs, how does one "point" the gem
>> command at a different ruby?  It seems like it might involve
>> customizing one's environment before running the gem command:
>>
>> + point GEM_HOME at the appropriate gems directory
>> ("..../lib/ruby/gems/X.Y")
>>
>> + point RUBYLIB at both .../lib/ruby *and* .../lib/site_ruby/X.Y
>>
>> Is that sufficient?  Also, is that necessary, or is there something
>> more straightforward I'm missing?
>>
>> Thanks...
>>
>> -glenn
>>
>> --
>> SD Ruby mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby
>
>
>  --
> SD Ruby mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby
>

-- 
SD Ruby mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby

Reply via email to