CentOS 4.2 (ruby-gems-0.8.11)
cd ~
mkdir ruby-db cd ruby-db $ rails th-db
Rails requires Ruby version 1.8.2 (2004-12-25) or later. You're running 1.8.1 (2003-12-25); please upgrade to continue.
;-(
Am I going to have to use Fedora on this server to use rails?
Craig
wget ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/ruby-1.8.4.tar.gz
D~
On 1/18/06, Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com wrote:
CentOS 4.2 (ruby-gems-0.8.11)
cd ~
mkdir ruby-db cd ruby-db $ rails th-db
Rails requires Ruby version 1.8.2 (2004-12-25) or later. You're running 1.8.1 (2003-12-25); please upgrade to continue.;-(
Am I going to have to use Fedora on this server to use rails?
Craig
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Top posting is bad on mailing lists mkay?
On 1/18/06, Dan Wright dwright134@gmail.com wrote:
wget ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/ruby-1.8.4.tar.gz
Building source on an rpm based distribution is bad mmmm'kay
It doesn't play nice with rpm/yum because there are no rpmdb entries for software installed from source. It makes updates tricky, and can have unexpected consequences depending on what is linked to first, path entries or overwritten files on update. It makes software audits more complicated in production environments. Etc,etc, etc. It's just not a nice thing to do to your server.
</soapbox>
-- Jim Perrin System Architect - UIT Ft Gordon & US Army Signal Center
On 1/18/06, Jim Perrin jperrin@gmail.com wrote:
Top posting is bad on mailing lists mkay?
On 1/18/06, Dan Wright dwright134@gmail.com wrote:
wget ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/ruby-1.8.4.tar.gz
Building source on an rpm based distribution is bad mmmm'kay
It doesn't play nice with rpm/yum because there are no rpmdb entries for software installed from source. It makes updates tricky, and can have unexpected consequences depending on what is linked to first, path entries or overwritten files on update. It makes software audits more complicated in production environments. Etc,etc, etc. It's just not a nice thing to do to your server.
</soapb
-- Jim Perrin System Architect - UIT Ft Gordon & US Army Signal Center _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Is this better? I apologize for my blatant disregard for proper mailing list etiquette mmm'kay. I guess we could also argue that all the white space in your post is a waste of bandwidth, but I degress.
Well anyways..... Thank you for bringing to my attention that a newer version of ruby exists for CentOS. I was not aware of that fact.
Dan
On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 00:36 -0600, Dan Wright wrote:
On 1/18/06, Jim Perrin jperrin@gmail.com wrote: Top posting is bad on mailing lists mkay?
On 1/18/06, Dan Wright <dwright134@gmail.com> wrote: > wget ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/ruby-1.8.4.tar.gz Building source on an rpm based distribution is bad mmmm'kay It doesn't play nice with rpm/yum because there are no rpmdb entries for software installed from source. It makes updates tricky, and can have unexpected consequences depending on what is linked to first, path entries or overwritten files on update. It makes software audits more complicated in production environments. Etc,etc, etc. It's just not a nice thing to do to your server. </soapb -- Jim Perrin System Architect - UIT Ft Gordon & US Army Signal Center _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centosIs this better? I apologize for my blatant disregard for proper mailing list etiquette mmm'kay. I guess we could also argue that all the white space in your post is a waste of bandwidth, but I degress.
Well anyways..... Thank you for bringing to my attention that a newer version of ruby exists for CentOS. I was not aware of that fact.
---- we all have our pet peeves - mine is hard to read html mail - apparently Jim's is top posted replies.
Anyway, I pretty much knew that I could install from source.
As for ruby - perhaps upstream is so focused on eclipse that it ignores rails and thus ruby as a language might be fine at 1.8.1 but as those who have checked it out, know that rails is a rapidly moving target and upstream isn't covering it.
For those who have a few minutes to burn - you might want to check out the interesting quicktime movies that they have which demonstrate ruby on rails...
http://www.rubyonrails.org/screencasts
personally, I haven't seen anything as exciting since the release of Netscape 2.0
;-)
Thanks
Craig
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Craig White wrote:
we all have our pet peeves - mine is hard to read html mail - apparently Jim's is top posted replies.
Mine is both. :-)
And a third.
People who complain about top-posting. :P
As for ruby - perhaps upstream is so focused on eclipse that it ignores rails and thus ruby as a language might be fine at 1.8.1 but as those who have checked it out, know that rails is a rapidly moving target and upstream isn't covering it.
Yeah, I think that's just life, though. There are quite a few pieces of software (slrn, ncftp, ruby) where I just go with source. Works fine.
For those who have a few minutes to burn - you might want to check out the interesting quicktime movies that they have which demonstrate ruby on rails...
http://www.rubyonrails.org/screencasts
personally, I haven't seen anything as exciting since the release of Netscape 2.0
;-)
Agreed. I love working with Java, J2EE, etc. but it's gotten to be kind of taxing and tedious to link together all the frameworks sometimes. So Rails is very refreshing. I think the reliance on CGI (no module as of yet for apache for rails as far as I know) is a pain. I wish that would be remedied. Other than that I think it has lots of promise if I can ever get the time to work on it (too busy doing Java).
That said, your comparison to Netscape 2.0 is apt. Thus the reason installing from source is the best option. :)
Preston
Craig White wrote:
As for ruby - perhaps upstream is so focused on eclipse that it ignores rails and thus ruby as a language might be fine at 1.8.1 but as those who have checked it out, know that rails is a rapidly moving target and upstream isn't covering it.
Now would also be a good time to point out that rubyonrails was only released as a stable 1 oh release just about a month back - and is still regarded as many people ( who use it ) to need work before it will work in an enterprise environment. And a lot of the other support components that people tend to want to use with rONr is still rated as Alpha or Beta grade code.
Second point, the ruby pkgs in dev.centos.org are not maintained as a part of Enterprise Linux by Upstream, and are liable to break apart, destroy your machine, cause major business loss and blah blah blah ( the point being that those pkgs are NOT EL maintained code at upstream, so keep that in mind ).
On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 10:34 +0000, Karanbir Singh wrote:
Craig White wrote:
As for ruby - perhaps upstream is so focused on eclipse that it ignores rails and thus ruby as a language might be fine at 1.8.1 but as those who have checked it out, know that rails is a rapidly moving target and upstream isn't covering it.
Now would also be a good time to point out that rubyonrails was only released as a stable 1 oh release just about a month back - and is still regarded as many people ( who use it ) to need work before it will work in an enterprise environment. And a lot of the other support components that people tend to want to use with rONr is still rated as Alpha or Beta grade code.
Second point, the ruby pkgs in dev.centos.org are not maintained as a part of Enterprise Linux by Upstream, and are liable to break apart, destroy your machine, cause major business loss and blah blah blah ( the point being that those pkgs are NOT EL maintained code at upstream, so keep that in mind ).
---- definitely understood.
My understanding was that rONr (I like that), was give stable 1 like July or August but I am not knowledgable on these things. I also recognize the churn within the project.
I definitely realized Upstream problem which is why I asked on list - and to my surprise found out about dev.centos.org packages.
I will consider only that I employ at my own risk - that is why I have a separate server for this and wondered if my choice of CentOS 4 needed to be evaluated in favor of FC-4 and I think I can stay put at CentOS 4
As a side note...I now know what a high volume mail list and centos-list, fedora-list are low volume compared to rails@rubyonrails.org list (where I am getting roughly 400 messages a day). Clearly there is some magic happening there.
Thanks for the efforts Karanbir and Jim.
Craig
Am I going to have to use Fedora on this server to use rails?
Fedora on a server...heheheh the idea of that always makes me laugh There are updated ruby packages available in the dev.centos.org testing repository. There's even a repo file there for you to add to make things simple. Enjoy, and be sure to leave feedback about the ruby rpms at http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=1173 so we know if it works well enough to move to centos-plus.
On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 21:11 -0500, Jim Perrin wrote:
Am I going to have to use Fedora on this server to use rails?
Fedora on a server...heheheh the idea of that always makes me laugh There are updated ruby packages available in the dev.centos.org testing repository. There's even a repo file there for you to add to make things simple. Enjoy, and be sure to leave feedback about the ruby rpms at http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=1173 so we know if it works well enough to move to centos-plus.
---- so far so good - installed (actually updated) irb/ruby/ruby-libs/ruby-devel/rdoc and even installed ri (but still haven't investigated it to figure out what it is.
Couldn't connect to postgresql without issues though so I ended up creating the db's in mysql and will work through postgres issue with rubyonrails-list
Thanks
Craig
Am Do, den 19.01.2006 schrieb Craig White um 1:54:
CentOS 4.2 (ruby-gems-0.8.11)
cd ~
mkdir ruby-db cd ruby-db $ rails th-db
Rails requires Ruby version 1.8.2 (2004-12-25) or later. You're running 1.8.1 (2003-12-25); please upgrade to continue.;-(
Am I going to have to use Fedora on this server to use rails?
Craig
http://dev.centos.org/centos/4.2/testing/i386/RPMS/ has it in a new version. dev.centos.org is usable a a yum repo.
Alexander
On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 03:17 +0100, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
Am Do, den 19.01.2006 schrieb Craig White um 1:54:
CentOS 4.2 (ruby-gems-0.8.11)
cd ~
mkdir ruby-db cd ruby-db $ rails th-db
Rails requires Ruby version 1.8.2 (2004-12-25) or later. You're running 1.8.1 (2003-12-25); please upgrade to continue.;-(
Am I going to have to use Fedora on this server to use rails?
Craig
http://dev.centos.org/centos/4.2/testing/i386/RPMS/ has it in a new version. dev.centos.org is usable a a yum repo.
---- thanks Alexander and Jim
I knew I didn't find these things on centosplus but I didn't know about dev.centos.org
I will definitely report back as I had mixed results today.
On my own FC-4 desktop, I got ruby on rails working without a problem. After I realized that I wasn't going to get it working on the CentOS-4 server that I set up, I set it all up on the desktop (also FC-4) that I am using at the client location. For some reason, all I could get was blank html pages and 500 errors from webrick and I decided that it was time to punt, go home and let it ride until tomorrow. I will now focus on the CentOS-4 server which is where I wanted it to be anyway.
Also...as long as I am doing so well on ruby (I saw updates for ruby/irb/rdoc/ruby-libs/ruby-devel/ (what the heck is ri ?) ...
How did you guys (or did anyone?) get mod_fastcgi installed? Did you compile from source?
Thanks
Craig
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Craig White wrote:
Rails requires Ruby version 1.8.2 (2004-12-25) or later. You're running 1.8.1 (2003-12-25); please upgrade to continue.
;-(
Am I going to have to use Fedora on this server to use rails?
Craig
I ran into the same issue. I do Ruby on Rails with CentOS, but I install everything from source. I just find it to be easier, Rails being still a work in progress.
Preston
-
Alexander Dalloz -
Craig White -
Dan Wright -
Jim Perrin -
Karanbir Singh -
Preston Crawford