Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

gem installations getting Killed

149 views
Skip to first unread message

Phil Tomson

unread,
Nov 1, 2004, 12:56:45 AM11/1/04
to
I just set up my laptop with Debian (via Knoppix - very easy, BTW) and
got Ruby 1.8.2 loaded via apt-get (and a few more libs and packages
that were required such as irb and libyaml-ruby - why isn't there a
Debian Ruby package that just includes most of this stuff? - sorry
differnt topic).

Next I downloaded and installed ruby-gems.

After this I tried using gem to install net-ssh and I got:

# gem install net-ssh
Attempting local installation of 'net-ssh'
Local gem file not found: net-ssh*.gem
Attempting remote installation of 'net-ssh'
Successfully installed net-ssh, version 0.1.0
Installing RDoc documentation for net-ssh-0.1.0...
Killed

What's with the 'Killed'?

I then tried installing session just to see if it might be a problem with
net-ssh:

# gem install session
Attempting local installation of 'session'
Local gem file not found: session*.gem
Attempting remote installation of 'session'
Successfully installed session, version 2.1.9
Installing RDoc documentation for session-2.1.9...


That seemed to work OK, but when I try to require 'session', it's not
found:

# irb
irb(main):001:0> require 'session'
LoadError: No such file to load -- session
from (irb):1:in `require'
from (irb):1
irb(main):002:0>

Phil

Stephan Kämper

unread,
Nov 1, 2004, 3:19:13 AM11/1/04
to
Phil Tomson wrote:
> ...

> Next I downloaded and installed ruby-gems.
>
> After this I tried using gem to install net-ssh and I got:
>
> I then tried installing session just to see if it might be a problem with
> net-ssh:
>
> # gem install session
> Attempting local installation of 'session'
> Local gem file not found: session*.gem
> Attempting remote installation of 'session'
> Successfully installed session, version 2.1.9
> Installing RDoc documentation for session-2.1.9...
>
>
> That seemed to work OK, but when I try to require 'session', it's not
> found:
>
> # irb
> irb(main):001:0> require 'session'
> LoadError: No such file to load -- session
> from (irb):1:in `require'
> from (irb):1
> irb(main):002:0>
>

With gems you need to

require 'rubygems'

before

require 'session'

for some reason.
I guess the point is, that this way rubygems is able to install a
missing gem.

What I don't like as much is that I have to think whether I installed
something as a gem or not. I'd rather my ruby installation would find a
gem-installed file even without 'require "rubygems"' (although I might
not have the additional service of installing/updating missing and/or
outdated gems during runtime).

Happy rubying

Stephan

gabriele renzi

unread,
Nov 1, 2004, 4:35:33 AM11/1/04
to
Stephan Kämper ha scritto:


> With gems you need to
>
> require 'rubygems'
>
> before
>
> require 'session'
>
> for some reason.
> I guess the point is, that this way rubygems is able to install a
> missing gem.

the reason is that rubygems uses require_gem to load a gem with a
specific version, and that method is not built in.

>
> What I don't like as much is that I have to think whether I installed
> something as a gem or not. I'd rather my ruby installation would find a
> gem-installed file even without 'require "rubygems"' (although I might
> not have the additional service of installing/updating missing and/or
> outdated gems during runtime).

see the latest announce. Something like setting RUBYOPT="rubygems"
should be enough for you to get away ignoring if you're using gems or
something else.

Phil Tomson

unread,
Nov 1, 2004, 12:24:20 PM11/1/04
to
In article <2um9rbF...@uni-berlin.de>,
Stephan Kämper <Stephan...@Schleswig-Holstein.de> wrote:
>Phil Tomson wrote:
> > ...

>
>With gems you need to
>
> require 'rubygems'
>
>before
>
> require 'session'
>
>for some reason.
>I guess the point is, that this way rubygems is able to install a
>missing gem.

Oh, right. For some reason I thought that you didn't have to require
'rubygems' anymore.

>
>What I don't like as much is that I have to think whether I installed
>something as a gem or not. I'd rather my ruby installation would find a
>gem-installed file even without 'require "rubygems"' (although I might
>not have the additional service of installing/updating missing and/or
>outdated gems during runtime).

Unfortuneatly, until rubygems is part of the Ruby distribution this will
probably be the case.

When running ruby you can say:
$ ruby -rubygems foo.rb

to have rubygems required before running your script (and you can create an
alias so that this gets done for you).

I just added "require 'rubygems'" to my .irbrc file.

Phil

0 new messages