Kai Chen (陈恺)
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "merb" group.
> To post to this group, send email to me...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to merb+uns...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/merb?hl=en.
RubyGems version has nothing to do with the version of Ruby.
Via inheriting the package from Debian, Ubuntu's RubyGems is broken by
design because you cannot use the gem update --system to upgrade the
RubyGems version when it is installed from package (and for other
reasons irrelevant to this discussion).
Generally, I install RubyGems from source on Ubuntu systems. However,
since some Rubyists have said 1.9.1 has its own problems, 1.9.2 is
recommended. The suggestion of rvm is probably the best bet, and you
would definitely want to use RubyGems from source there.
This is not Ubuntu/Debian problem. RubyGems is broken by design.
That `gem update --system` doesn't work when installing the RubyGems
package on Debian/Ubuntu?
No, that is specifically a packaging decision taken by the rubygems
package maintainer. That command works on OS X and RubyGems installed
from source just fine.
gem update --system shouldn't exist. And the Debian guys did the right thing.
> gem update --system shouldn't exist. And the Debian guys did the right thing.
Why? Isn't that the preferred method for updating RubyGems?
% gem help update
Usage: gem update GEMNAME [GEMNAME ...] [options]
--system Update the RubyGems system software
My understanding, after being involved with Ruby projects for the last three years is that installing RubyGems from source, and updating it with the above is the preference. Generally speaking, binary distributions lag behind upstream versions; this is nothing new.
For example, RHEL 6 has Ruby 1.8.6: ruby-126.96.36.1993-6.1.el6.x86_64.rpm
There is a script to allow it. Try this:
$ sudo gem install rubygems-update
$ sudo update_rubygems