** Changed in: ruby1.9.1 (Ubuntu)
Status: New = Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/706603
Title:
gem1.9.1 doens't install executables on PATH
To manage notifications
A few people discussed this issue on #ubuntu-devel and we came to the
following conclusion:
1) We should coordinate this change in both Ubuntu and Debian.
2) We should change the install location for gems to /usr/local. We
still have to patch upstream source as the default install location
This has been debated over and over again.
/usr/local/bin was rejected because the packaging and filesystem policy
clashes. I cannot offer any solution that would not raise all the objections
from both sides.
BTW: would it be possible to solve the problem by instaling gems as is
today and
There's no easy way to add a directory to PATH.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/706603
Title:
gem1.9.1 doens't install executables on PATH
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
This has been debated over and over again.
/usr/local/bin was rejected because the packaging and filesystem policy
clashes.
I've found these previous discussions:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ruby1.8/+bug/145267
and
You can install gems from debian packages which _cannot_ put things into
/usr/local/. You can also install gems directly. This would probably be
a nightmare to maintain.
In my personal opinion the /var/lib path is broken too. The problem with
the language-centric repositories and their
I used some confusing statements in my previous comment. I would also
like to clarify some things.
1) Package installed with domain-specific manager like gem or pip
becomes debian package at installation time. It can be removed and
upgraded using either of the managers (with appropriate
You can install gems from debian packages
Something is either a gem or a deb package. A Ruby package installed via
apt should not show up as RubyGem and a Ruby package installed via gem
should not show up as deb. A cleanly written Ruby program that requires
a library doesn't care with which
Stefan, there is no semantic difference between a gem and a deb package.
It's just a difference of implementation details. From users point of
view they both install, remove and upgrade things. By making both play
well with each other you improve the user experience. That said, I agree
that the
it's not a simple problem to solve
I disagree. The current state is this: Installation instructions
recommend installing RubyGems from source because Ubuntu's is broken.
This rubygems installed from source in combination with a Ruby installed
from apt will cause gem to write executables in
I'll try reopen the discussion about gem policy.
Despite all debian security concerns there is a very vocal ruby
community that shuns our patches and we should work to make the
situation better.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed
11 matches
Mail list logo
