Best Linux Distro for Ruby?

Discussion in 'Ruby' started by Nick Hird, Jan 2, 2011.

  1. Nick Hird

    Nick Hird Guest

    What are some of the better linux distro's for ruby development? I know
    some seem to have crippled packages or missing current versions and such.
    I am just looking for a solid linux distro to install so i can really get
    to know Ruby.
    Thanks,
    -Nick
    Nick Hird, Jan 2, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Nick Hird

    Thomas Yao Guest

    On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Nick Hird <> wrote:
    > What are some of the better linux distro's for ruby development? I know some
    > seem to have crippled packages or missing current versions and such. I am
    > just looking for a solid linux distro to install so i can really get to know
    > Ruby.


    Use RVM to manage your ruby versions, then you'll find all the Linux
    distro are same for Ruby development.
    If you're newbie to Linux, use ubuntu 10.10 will be a good choice.

    --
    Twitter: @ghosTM55
    Facebook.com/ghosThomas

    Mechanism, not policy
    Thomas Yao, Jan 2, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Nick Hird

    Stu Guest

    I've got rvm set up on Funtoo, Mac OSX and FreeBSD.

    Funtoo portage, Darwin ports, and FreeBSD ports of ruby 1.8.7 and
    1.9.2 are up to date and work as expected. FreeBSD is set up with
    multiple jails with both system based ruby and rvm installed.

    If your worried about what you call crippled packages consider using a
    source based OS or just use rvm to build the source for you.

    ~

    On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Thomas Yao <> wrote:
    > On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Nick Hird <> wrote:
    >> What are some of the better linux distro's for ruby development? I know some
    >> seem to have crippled packages or missing current versions and such. I am
    >> just looking for a solid linux distro to install so i can really get to know
    >> Ruby.

    >
    > Use RVM to manage your ruby versions, then you'll find all the Linux
    > distro are same for Ruby development.
    > If you're newbie to Linux, use ubuntu 10.10 will be a good choice.
    >
    > --
    > Twitter: @ghosTM55
    > Facebook.com/ghosThomas
    >
    > Mechanism, not policy
    >
    >
    Stu, Jan 2, 2011
    #3
  4. Nick Hird

    koulikoff Guest

    On Jan 2, 5:44 am, Thomas Yao <> wrote:
    > On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Nick Hird <> wrote:
    > If you're newbie to Linux, use ubuntu 10.10 will be a good choice.

    Or kubuntu ;-)
    koulikoff, Jan 2, 2011
    #4
  5. Nick Hird

    James Earl Guest

    Nick Hird wrote in post #971817:
    > What are some of the better linux distro's for ruby development? I know
    > some seem to have crippled packages or missing current versions and
    > such.
    > I am just looking for a solid linux distro to install so i can really
    > get
    > to know Ruby.
    > Thanks,
    > -Nick


    I've been using Arch Linux and Ruby 1.9.2 for development, and also have
    some sites deployed on Rackspace without any problems. I originally
    came to Arch from FreeBSD.

    --
    Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
    James Earl, Jan 3, 2011
    #5
  6. Nick Hird

    S2 akira Guest

    Nick Hird wrote in post #971817:
    > What are some of the better linux distro's for ruby development?


    I use Ubuntu, everything's fine.

    --
    Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
    S2 akira, Jan 3, 2011
    #6
  7. Nick Hird

    Jon W. Guest

    I think Ubuntu is a little confusing to new Ruby developers. I
    personally wouldn't recommend it. Some things that bug me about it
    (coming from a Windows background using Ruby)

    1. Ubuntu has a Ruby 1.9.1 package that you can install, which is
    really Ruby 1.9.2 but when you install it using Synaptic Package Manager
    the system also installs Ruby 1.8.7 and then requires you to fiddle
    with the symbolic links on the path of Gem and Ruby executables. Also,
    the --update flag for ruby commands wont work if you install that way.
    Its annoying.

    2. RVM may be the way to go but Ubuntu doesn't have a default package
    for installing it via Synaptic Package Manager. Another annoyance.

    So, im investigating other distros. My guess is that astandard install
    of Debian will be the way to go. Fedora seemed a little behind the
    times on providing recent packages also.

    If I am going to use RVM then I'll use a system which seems to expect it
    Jon W., Jan 9, 2011
    #7
  8. Nick Hird

    Stu Guest

    On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Jon W. <> wrote:

    >
    > If I am going to use RVM then I'll use a system which seems to expect it
    >


    Hello djangofan!

    Nothing wrong with a software developer looking up and installing some
    dependencies once in awhile. rvm is simply a set of bash scripts.
    does it matter if you install it via git directly or synaptic.
    Stu, Jan 10, 2011
    #8
  9. [Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

    Jon ..Ubuntu is little good call for begginers...but if u want developer
    seriously I recommend a light distro like Arch or Debian XFCE..But is just
    my favorites...keep going with ubuntu and lear something about the package
    system and search in google .

    2011/1/9 Stu <>

    > On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Jon W. <> wrote:
    >
    > >
    > > If I am going to use RVM then I'll use a system which seems to expect it
    > >

    >
    > Hello djangofan!
    >
    > Nothing wrong with a software developer looking up and installing some
    > dependencies once in awhile. rvm is simply a set of bash scripts.
    > does it matter if you install it via git directly or synaptic.
    >
    >
    Sergio Fernandes, Jan 10, 2011
    #9
  10. Nick Hird

    paul h Guest

    On Jan 9, 10:10 pm, "Jon W." <> wrote:
    > I think Ubuntu is a little confusing to new Ruby developers.  I
    > personally wouldn't recommend it.   Some things that bug me about it
    > (coming from a Windows background using Ruby)
    >
    >  1.  Ubuntu has a Ruby 1.9.1 package that you can install, which is
    > really Ruby 1.9.2 but when you install it using Synaptic Package Manager
    > the system also installs Ruby 1.8.7  and then requires you to fiddle
    > with the symbolic links on the path of Gem and Ruby executables.   Also,
    > the --update   flag for ruby commands wont work if you install that way..
    > Its annoying.
    >
    >   2.  RVM may be the way to go but Ubuntu doesn't have a default package
    > for installing it via Synaptic Package Manager.  Another annoyance.
    >
    > So, im investigating other distros.  My guess is that astandard install
    > of Debian will be the way to go.   Fedora seemed a little behind the
    > times on providing recent packages also.
    >
    > If I am going to use RVM then I'll use a system which seems to expect it

    Hi Jon,

    I've got a CentOS 5 server running Ruby 1.9.2 no problem. The only
    package available is 1.8.5, so I needed to build from source, but it's
    straighforward enough. (I'm from Windows, moved to Linux a few months
    ago knowing nothing about 'nix - a little investigation with; a few
    good books, and mostly googling, got me the information required to
    build from source with required dependencies installed first.)

    I also have Ubuntu 10.04 and 10.10 locally with RVM installed on both
    and running different Ruby versions with different Gem's. Everything
    works fine.

    I want to try to build from source on Ubuntu - because I want to
    learn, (I've decided Windows is crap (especially for ruby) IMHO since
    moving to *nix - but in the meantime, RVM is ideal for me on Ubuntu.

    Best

    Paul
    paul h, Jan 10, 2011
    #10
  11. Nick Hird

    meaglith Guest

    [Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

    Gentoo is good choice. I install ruby 1.9.2 from source code.
    -------------------------------------------------------
    Blog: http://douhua.im
    Twitter: http://twitter.com/genedna
    Website: http://douhua.im
    -------------------------------------------------------


    On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 11:25 PM, paul h <> wrote:

    > On Jan 9, 10:10 pm, "Jon W." <> wrote:
    > > I think Ubuntu is a little confusing to new Ruby developers. I
    > > personally wouldn't recommend it. Some things that bug me about it
    > > (coming from a Windows background using Ruby)
    > >
    > > 1. Ubuntu has a Ruby 1.9.1 package that you can install, which is
    > > really Ruby 1.9.2 but when you install it using Synaptic Package Manager
    > > the system also installs Ruby 1.8.7 and then requires you to fiddle
    > > with the symbolic links on the path of Gem and Ruby executables. Also,
    > > the --update flag for ruby commands wont work if you install that way.
    > > Its annoying.
    > >
    > > 2. RVM may be the way to go but Ubuntu doesn't have a default package
    > > for installing it via Synaptic Package Manager. Another annoyance.
    > >
    > > So, im investigating other distros. My guess is that astandard install
    > > of Debian will be the way to go. Fedora seemed a little behind the
    > > times on providing recent packages also.
    > >
    > > If I am going to use RVM then I'll use a system which seems to expect it

    > Hi Jon,
    >
    > I've got a CentOS 5 server running Ruby 1.9.2 no problem. The only
    > package available is 1.8.5, so I needed to build from source, but it's
    > straighforward enough. (I'm from Windows, moved to Linux a few months
    > ago knowing nothing about 'nix - a little investigation with; a few
    > good books, and mostly googling, got me the information required to
    > build from source with required dependencies installed first.)
    >
    > I also have Ubuntu 10.04 and 10.10 locally with RVM installed on both
    > and running different Ruby versions with different Gem's. Everything
    > works fine.
    >
    > I want to try to build from source on Ubuntu - because I want to
    > learn, (I've decided Windows is crap (especially for ruby) IMHO since
    > moving to *nix - but in the meantime, RVM is ideal for me on Ubuntu.
    >
    > Best
    >
    > Paul
    >
    >
    >
    meaglith, Jan 13, 2011
    #11
  12. Check out ArchLinux, their package is pretty much pristine and tracks
    1.9 (current 1.9.2-p136)

    2011/1/13 meaglith <>:
    > Gentoo is good choice. I install ruby 1.9.2 from source code.
    > -------------------------------------------------------
    > Blog: http://douhua.im
    > Twitter: http://twitter.com/genedna
    > Website: http://douhua.im
    > -------------------------------------------------------
    >
    >
    > On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 11:25 PM, paul h <> wrote:
    >
    >> On Jan 9, 10:10 pm, "Jon W." <> wrote:
    >> > I think Ubuntu is a little confusing to new Ruby developers. =C2=A0I
    >> > personally wouldn't recommend it. =C2=A0 Some things that bug me about=

    it
    >> > (coming from a Windows background using Ruby)
    >> >
    >> > =C2=A01. =C2=A0Ubuntu has a Ruby 1.9.1 package that you can install, w=

    hich is
    >> > really Ruby 1.9.2 but when you install it using Synaptic Package Manag=

    er
    >> > the system also installs Ruby 1.8.7 =C2=A0and then requires you to fid=

    dle
    >> > with the symbolic links on the path of Gem and Ruby executables. =C2=

    =A0 Also,
    >> > the --update =C2=A0 flag for ruby commands wont work if you install th=

    at way.
    >> > Its annoying.
    >> >
    >> > =C2=A0 2. =C2=A0RVM may be the way to go but Ubuntu doesn't have a def=

    ault package
    >> > for installing it via Synaptic Package Manager. =C2=A0Another annoyanc=

    e.
    >> >
    >> > So, im investigating other distros. =C2=A0My guess is that astandard i=

    nstall
    >> > of Debian will be the way to go. =C2=A0 Fedora seemed a little behind =

    the
    >> > times on providing recent packages also.
    >> >
    >> > If I am going to use RVM then I'll use a system which seems to expect =

    it
    >> Hi Jon,
    >>
    >> I've got a CentOS 5 server running Ruby 1.9.2 no problem. The only
    >> package available is 1.8.5, so I needed to build from source, but it's
    >> straighforward enough. (I'm from Windows, moved to Linux a few months
    >> ago knowing nothing about 'nix - a little investigation with; a few
    >> good books, and mostly googling, got me the information required to
    >> build from source with required dependencies installed first.)
    >>
    >> I also have Ubuntu 10.04 and 10.10 locally with RVM installed on both
    >> and running different Ruby versions with different Gem's. Everything
    >> works fine.
    >>
    >> I want to try to build from source on Ubuntu - because I want to
    >> learn, (I've decided Windows is crap (especially for ruby) IMHO since
    >> moving to *nix - but in the meantime, RVM is ideal for me on Ubuntu.
    >>
    >> Best
    >>
    >> Paul
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    Jonas Pfenniger (zimbatm), Jan 13, 2011
    #12
  13. Nick Hird

    Culley Smith Guest

    [Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

    I have installed Ruby, Rails, and related dependencies on Ubuntu 10.04,
    10.10 and ArchLinux. ArchLinux was a bit easier. I ended up purging
    everything I had installed from the Ubuntu repositories and just relied
    solely on RVM.

    Regardless of the distro I believe using RVM is a good course of action.
    Not only for being able to switch between versions, but because it has many
    more useful features available. You can still use your distro's package
    manger and repositories, but RVM's sole purpose is really a ruby/rails
    package manager, so is more feature rich in terms of how you install/manage
    ruby/rails.

    I guess my opinion here would be to stick with whatever distro you like...
    and rely on RVM.

    Culley

    On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Jonas Pfenniger (zimbatm) <
    > wrote:

    > Check out ArchLinux, their package is pretty much pristine and tracks
    > 1.9 (current 1.9.2-p136)
    >
    > 2011/1/13 meaglith <>:
    > > Gentoo is good choice. I install ruby 1.9.2 from source code.
    > > -------------------------------------------------------
    > > Blog: http://douhua.im
    > > Twitter: http://twitter.com/genedna
    > > Website: http://douhua.im
    > > -------------------------------------------------------
    > >
    > >
    > > On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 11:25 PM, paul h <> wrote:
    > >
    > >> On Jan 9, 10:10 pm, "Jon W." <> wrote:
    > >> > I think Ubuntu is a little confusing to new Ruby developers. I
    > >> > personally wouldn't recommend it. Some things that bug me about it
    > >> > (coming from a Windows background using Ruby)
    > >> >
    > >> > 1. Ubuntu has a Ruby 1.9.1 package that you can install, which is
    > >> > really Ruby 1.9.2 but when you install it using Synaptic Package

    > Manager
    > >> > the system also installs Ruby 1.8.7 and then requires you to fiddle
    > >> > with the symbolic links on the path of Gem and Ruby executables.

    > Also,
    > >> > the --update flag for ruby commands wont work if you install that

    > way.
    > >> > Its annoying.
    > >> >
    > >> > 2. RVM may be the way to go but Ubuntu doesn't have a default

    > package
    > >> > for installing it via Synaptic Package Manager. Another annoyance.
    > >> >
    > >> > So, im investigating other distros. My guess is that astandard

    > install
    > >> > of Debian will be the way to go. Fedora seemed a little behind the
    > >> > times on providing recent packages also.
    > >> >
    > >> > If I am going to use RVM then I'll use a system which seems to expect

    > it
    > >> Hi Jon,
    > >>
    > >> I've got a CentOS 5 server running Ruby 1.9.2 no problem. The only
    > >> package available is 1.8.5, so I needed to build from source, but it's
    > >> straighforward enough. (I'm from Windows, moved to Linux a few months
    > >> ago knowing nothing about 'nix - a little investigation with; a few
    > >> good books, and mostly googling, got me the information required to
    > >> build from source with required dependencies installed first.)
    > >>
    > >> I also have Ubuntu 10.04 and 10.10 locally with RVM installed on both
    > >> and running different Ruby versions with different Gem's. Everything
    > >> works fine.
    > >>
    > >> I want to try to build from source on Ubuntu - because I want to
    > >> learn, (I've decided Windows is crap (especially for ruby) IMHO since
    > >> moving to *nix - but in the meantime, RVM is ideal for me on Ubuntu.
    > >>
    > >> Best
    > >>
    > >> Paul
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>

    > >

    >
    >
    Culley Smith, Jan 13, 2011
    #13
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. member thudfoo
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    284
    member thudfoo
    Jan 5, 2009
  2. Guest
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    468
    Guest
    Jan 6, 2009
  3. Hal Fulton

    Ruby-oriented Linux distro?

    Hal Fulton, Oct 22, 2003, in forum: Ruby
    Replies:
    27
    Views:
    371
    gabriele renzi
    Oct 24, 2003
  4. Andrew Walrond
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    116
    Dennis Oelkers
    Feb 1, 2004
  5. Andrew Walrond
    Replies:
    30
    Views:
    335
    Benny
    Mar 7, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page