Ruby install on Kubuntu Linux - why so spread out

[Tom Cloyd]

I've migrated from WinXP in recent days, and I'm having trouble getting
up to speed with Ruby on Kubuntu (7.10).

My question at the moment has to do with the nature of the installation.
I installed ruby from the package manager database, using Adept. It
tells me that it's installing 'Ruby 1.8 - the current stable version".
Not 1.85x, but 1.8. I'm offered the option of 1.9, as well. I went with
1.8 (hoping that it really was more l

Then I went looking for it. In WinXP, I got a Start menu "Ruby" entry,
with irb, etc. In Kubuntu, it appears that programs installs mostly just
get eaten up by the file system, and I get to go hunt them down. In
WinXP, Ruby sits in a single obvious directory, in root - C:\ruby. In
Kubuntu, it seems to be a ship wreck. I had to do a systematic search of
the file system to find...

/usr/bin/ruby1.8
/usr/share/doc/ruby1.8
/usr/lib/ruby/1.8

One question - why? Am I supposed to KNOW that this is where things end
up? Why is it done this way?

I'm delighted with Kubuntu Linux, overwhelmingly, but I'm puzzled by
this shotgun installation. Can anyone explain the thinking behind this?

Tom

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tom Cloyd, MS MA, LMHC
Private practice Psychotherapist
Bellingham, Washington, U.S.A: (360) 920-1226
<< (e-mail address removed) >> (email)
<< TomCloyd.com >> (website & psychotherapy weblog)
<< sleightmind.wordpress.com >> (mental health issues weblog)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Peter Hickman]

down. In WinXP, Ruby sits in a single obvious directory, in root -
C:\ruby. In Kubuntu, it seems to be a ship wreck. I had to do a
systematic search of the file system to find...

/usr/bin/ruby1.8

/usr/bin is where installed commands are placed. The ones that come with
the OS would be in /bin and your own ones could end up in
/usr/local/bin. The root binaries start in /sbin, /usr/sbin and the
like. This directory naming thing is the way Unix handles things.

/usr/share/doc/ruby1.8

Yup, all documentation usually ends up here under /usr/share/doc

/usr/lib/ruby/1.8

One question - why? Am I supposed to KNOW that this is where things
end up?

You don't have to know but it can be useful.

Why is it done this way?

I'm delighted with Kubuntu Linux, overwhelmingly, but I'm puzzled by
this shotgun installation. Can anyone explain the thinking behind this?

The thinking is that like things live together. So all the executable
commands live in /usr/bin (and the like), documentation lives in
/usr/share/doc and libraries live in /usr/lib. It's not perfect and some
things decide to install their stuff in the oddest places but it mostly
works.

 

[Casimir]

Tom Cloyd kirjoitti:

I've migrated from WinXP in recent days, and I'm having trouble getting
up to speed with Ruby on Kubuntu (7.10).

Then I went looking for it. In WinXP, I got a Start menu "Ruby" entry,
with irb, etc. In Kubuntu, it appears that programs installs mostly just
get eaten up by the file system, and I get to go hunt them down. In
WinXP, Ruby sits in a single obvious directory, in root - C:\ruby. In
Kubuntu, it seems to be a ship wreck. I had to do a systematic search of
the file system to find...

Shuure, its a ship wreck, that why its used in most production servers
in the world...

You can easily add any program in the menu. Yes, there is some learning
to do when you take on a whole new OS, yes you will experience frustration.

How about googling "Linux File System" and maybe add "Structure" or
"Tutorial" to that?

/usr/bin/ruby1.8
/usr/share/doc/ruby1.8
/usr/lib/ruby/1.8

One question - why? Am I supposed to KNOW that this is where things end
up? Why is it done this way?

Because linux is not Windows XP, thank god. Realize that you need to
re-learn some things. The Windows way is far from perfect...

I'm delighted with Kubuntu Linux, overwhelmingly, but I'm puzzled by
this shotgun installation. Can anyone explain the thinking behind this?

Actually, the developers of (Kubuntu) should be puzzled by your
thinking. Why would Windows be the perfect model for an OS. Newsflash!
It is not. Take off your Bill Gates -colored glasses!

My advice is:

* Install Yakuake (a command line terminal that pops up when you hit the
shortcut (default F12).
* Have kubuntu load yakuake at startup.
* Learn command line file manipulation, apt-get, ruby compilation.
* Presto - you have teh powa! You will *never* want to go back to Windows.

Well, Just My Opinion..

 

[Todd Benson]

I've migrated from WinXP in recent days, and I'm having trouble getting
up to speed with Ruby on Kubuntu (7.10).

My question at the moment has to do with the nature of the installation.
I installed ruby from the package manager database, using Adept. It
tells me that it's installing 'Ruby 1.8 - the current stable version".
Not 1.85x, but 1.8. I'm offered the option of 1.9, as well. I went with
1.8 (hoping that it really was more l

Then I went looking for it. In WinXP, I got a Start menu "Ruby" entry,
with irb, etc. In Kubuntu, it appears that programs installs mostly just
get eaten up by the file system, and I get to go hunt them down.

This is not exclusive to Ruby. *nixes somewhat expect you to know
what goes where.

WinXP, Ruby sits in a single obvious directory, in root - C:\ruby

Don't be so quick about WinXP. Not everything is perfectly in one
place, and depending on how you do the installation, the registry may
also be altered.

Kubuntu, it seems to be a ship wreck. I had to do a systematic search of
the file system to find...

/usr/bin/ruby1.8
/usr/share/doc/ruby1.8
/usr/lib/ruby/1.8

One question - why? Am I supposed to KNOW that this is where things end
up? Why is it done this way?

Someone else can give you a straight answer about the 1.8 part, but I
assume it's because people in the past have suffered from over-writing
their generically-termed "ruby" installation. As for the various
directories, that is sort of a general way of laying things out on the
OS.

I typically build my own from source, and, if need be, do a ln -s

I'm delighted with Kubuntu Linux, overwhelmingly, but I'm puzzled by
this shotgun installation. Can anyone explain the thinking behind this?

Also, it makes it easier for developers to write to a generic file
system setup. Windows also does a similar thing, just in a different
way.

Todd

 

[Marc Heiler]

I'm delighted with Kubuntu Linux, overwhelmingly, but I'm puzzled by
They mostly follow historic reasons (everyone was and is doing it this
way) and the FHS - and of course their own way to add complexity to
everything. ;-)

For another philosophy take a look at
http://www.gobolinux.org/?page=at_a_glance

 

[Peter Hickman]

Casimir I'm going to have to call you on this. As you may have just
noticed we had a long thread on Zed Shaw leaving, one of Zed's
complaints what the trollish behaviour and general unpleasantness of the
people on the rails mailing list. There was some hope that it would not
spread to here. Then you posted.

Tom's question is a perfectly valid one and completely understandable
for someone coming from windows to linux. He has not posted a mindless
pro windows post and does not deserve the likes of "Why would Windows be
the perfect model for an OS. Newsflash! It is not. Take off your Bill
Gates -colored glasses!"

Did Tom say that the windows way was perfect? No. Then you did you post
that drivel?

Enough of this behaviour already.

 

[Casimir]

Peter Hickman kirjoitti:

Tom's question is a perfectly valid one and completely understandable
for someone coming from windows to linux. He has not posted a mindless
pro windows post and does not deserve the likes of "Why would Windows be
the perfect model for an OS. Newsflash! It is not. Take off your Bill
Gates -colored glasses!"

Shhuure. I am the most evil person on here after Giles.

You took my quote out of context. Besides, if you have probs with me
replying to *all* questions in a post, you are in the wrong place.

On the usenet no-one can hear your off-topic trolling, Peter...

 

[Todd Benson]

Peter Hickman kirjoitti:

Shhuure. I am the most evil person on here after Giles.

You took my quote out of context. Besides, if you have probs with me
replying to *all* questions in a post, you are in the wrong place.

On the usenet no-one can hear your off-topic trolling, Peter...

I can't put words into Peter's mouth, so I don't know what he thinks,
but for me it seems like you're helping a little, just in a very very
weird way. Tone down the caustic language just a little bit. You
don't really want people hating you, do you?

Todd

 

[Casimir]

I was just writing a reply to these two EVER SO RIGHTEUSLY HELPFUL
OVERLORDS (Todd Benson and Peter Hickman) of alt.comp.ruby as a ruby
script in IRB...

But as I was typing "über = Array.new" IRB died instantly. Same on 2nd
and 3rd time. Umlaut U. Html code &uuml; or ü.

Anyone know why is this?

All those interested in things only Ruby can ignore the rest of this post.


Todd Benson kirjoitti:

I can't put words into Peter's mouth, so I don't know what he thinks,
but for me it seems like you're helping a little, just in a very very
weird way. Tone down the caustic language just a little bit. You
don't really want people hating you, do you?

OMG are you threatening me? OMG I am sooo afraid now. *Begs for mercy*
*whimper* I will never reply to people picking on my posts in anything
but the most pleasing tone again just to pleasure you and Peter!

ALSO I will always include you two as recipients in ALL usenet posts I
make from now on, just to please you and your infinite intelligence, so
you can censor my posts and correct my evil horrible caustic acidic
ways. *backs up and bows on each step*

Csmr

 

[Tom Cloyd]

Thanks, guys. Definitely helpful. I still think it's easier to put it
all in one place, and I'm not characterizing WinXP when I say that -
just how my ruby got installed there by the windows installer. As for
the "shotgun" installation on Kubuntu - I suspected there was a logic to
it, but didn't know what it was. I'm moving very fast with Kubuntu, out
of necessity, and I'm not a CS pro, so I smack into my ignorance a lot.

Having now a bit of a roadmap for the *nix filesystem - that'll help,
definitely.

And...I left my WinXP for a reason. Sick of it. Kubuntu is much more to
my liking, although that's just my taste. And, of course, I'd like it
all to be set up to please me. Matz has his language, so why can't I
have... Well, that's crazy-making thinking, and I'll try to stop it!

Wonderful how I got a flurry of replies FAST, here. I very rarely post.
Nice experience.

Finally, I read the long Zed Shaw thread, and then cruised his piece.
Good Lord - it doesn't matter how smart he is. He has no people skills.
And...no one owes us anything, not as an adult. He needs to take
responsibility - the "ability to respond" and get his life to work, as
do we all. He's squandering his energy and talent, and achieving what?
High status at the middle school? Amazing.

t.

I've migrated from WinXP in recent days, and I'm having trouble
getting up to speed with Ruby on Kubuntu (7.10).

My question at the moment has to do with the nature of the
installation. I installed ruby from the package manager database,
using Adept. It tells me that it's installing 'Ruby 1.8 - the current
stable version". Not 1.85x, but 1.8. I'm offered the option of 1.9, as
well. I went with 1.8 (hoping that it really was more l

Then I went looking for it. In WinXP, I got a Start menu "Ruby" entry,
with irb, etc. In Kubuntu, it appears that programs installs mostly
just get eaten up by the file system, and I get to go hunt them down.
In WinXP, Ruby sits in a single obvious directory, in root - C:\ruby.
In Kubuntu, it seems to be a ship wreck. I had to do a systematic
search of the file system to find...

/usr/bin/ruby1.8
/usr/share/doc/ruby1.8
/usr/lib/ruby/1.8

One question - why? Am I supposed to KNOW that this is where things
end up? Why is it done this way?

I'm delighted with Kubuntu Linux, overwhelmingly, but I'm puzzled by
this shotgun installation. Can anyone explain the thinking behind this?

Tom

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tom Cloyd, MS MA, LMHC
Private practice Psychotherapist
Bellingham, Washington, U.S.A: (360) 920-1226
<< (e-mail address removed) >> (email)
<< TomCloyd.com >> (website & psychotherapy weblog)
<< sleightmind.wordpress.com >> (mental health issues weblog)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Tom Cloyd]

Casimir,

I appreciate your suggestion about Yakuake, and will pursue it. One of
the things I can to Linux for was more direct access to the system. This
will facilitate that.

Your sarcasm, however, is a poor rhetorical choice. In my experience,
those who resort to this are either following poor models (we don't all
come from great families) or scared - they can't imagine surviving what
would happen if they simply spoke their mind.

I suggest you shoot straight or keep it put away. I did get it from the
start that you're a high energy guy, but that doesn't get you off the
hook, any more than's Zed's being wronged (if we assume he gave correct
report of it) excuses his writing like he's 14 years old, which he
surely isn't.

I didn't take offense at your mis-characterizing what I wrote. I just
ignored it. I think Peter has you to rights - I'm not defending Windows.
I'm expressing a liking for putting things all in one dir. I was asking
why anyone would do it otherwise. Fair question. Peter explained why,
and now I'm informed. Fair exchange.

Your considerable energy would go further if you just spoke plainly. I
hope we may see that in the future.

Tom

I was just writing a reply to these two EVER SO RIGHTEUSLY HELPFUL
OVERLORDS (Todd Benson and Peter Hickman) of alt.comp.ruby as a ruby
script in IRB...

But as I was typing "über = Array.new" IRB died instantly. Same on 2nd
and 3rd time. Umlaut U. Html code &uuml; or ü.

Anyone know why is this?

All those interested in things only Ruby can ignore the rest of this
post.


Todd Benson kirjoitti:

OMG are you threatening me? OMG I am sooo afraid now. *Begs for mercy*
*whimper* I will never reply to people picking on my posts in anything
but the most pleasing tone again just to pleasure you and Peter!

ALSO I will always include you two as recipients in ALL usenet posts I
make from now on, just to please you and your infinite intelligence,
so you can censor my posts and correct my evil horrible caustic acidic
ways. *backs up and bows on each step*

Csmr

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tom Cloyd, MS MA, LMHC
Private practice Psychotherapist
Bellingham, Washington, U.S.A: (360) 920-1226
<< (e-mail address removed) >> (email)
<< TomCloyd.com >> (website & psychotherapy weblog)
<< sleightmind.wordpress.com >> (mental health issues weblog)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Reid Thompson]

I've migrated from WinXP in recent days, and I'm having trouble getting
up to speed with Ruby on Kubuntu (7.10).

My question at the moment has to do with the nature of the installation.
I installed ruby from the package manager database, using Adept. It
tells me that it's installing 'Ruby 1.8 - the current stable version".
Not 1.85x, but 1.8. I'm offered the option of 1.9, as well. I went with
1.8 (hoping that it really was more l

Then I went looking for it. In WinXP, I got a Start menu "Ruby" entry,
with irb, etc. In Kubuntu, it appears that programs installs mostly just
get eaten up by the file system, and I get to go hunt them down. In
WinXP, Ruby sits in a single obvious directory, in root - C:\ruby. In
Kubuntu, it seems to be a ship wreck. I had to do a systematic search of
the file system to find...

/usr/bin/ruby1.8
/usr/share/doc/ruby1.8
/usr/lib/ruby/1.8

One question - why? Am I supposed to KNOW that this is where things end
up? Why is it done this way?

I'm delighted with Kubuntu Linux, overwhelmingly, but I'm puzzled by
this shotgun installation. Can anyone explain the thinking behind this?

Tom

see Filesystem Hierarchy Standard

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem_Hierarchy_Standard

http://www.pathname.com/fhs/

 

[Jan Dvorak]

I've migrated from WinXP in recent days, and I'm having trouble getting
up to speed with Ruby on Kubuntu (7.10).
...
One question - why? Am I supposed to KNOW that this is where things end
up? Why is it done this way?

I'm delighted with Kubuntu Linux, overwhelmingly, but I'm puzzled by
this shotgun installation. Can anyone explain the thinking behind this?

In addition to what others have said, you can always go to Adept and display
details for ruby1.8 package, where you can see all the installed files with
full paths.

To save you one further surprise, ruby gems will get installed
to /var/lib/gems/1.8 on Ubuntu linux - it's somewhat nonstandard placement,
but makes sense from the perspective that you will be installing/upgrading
them often and are thus they are VARying data.

Jan

 

[Giles Bowkett]

Dude, chill out, you freak.

--
Giles Bowkett

Podcast: http://hollywoodgrit.blogspot.com
Blog: http://gilesbowkett.blogspot.com
Portfolio: http://www.gilesgoatboy.org
Tumblelog: http://giles.tumblr.com

 

[Tom Cloyd]

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

Thanks, Reid. I would not likely have found that stuff on my own, and it
definitely advances my understanding. Man, I do love wikipedia - as do a
lot of others, apparently!

t.

see Filesystem Hierarchy Standard

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem_Hierarchy_Standard

http://www.pathname.com/fhs/

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tom Cloyd, MS MA, LMHC
Private practice Psychotherapist
Bellingham, Washington, U.S.A: (360) 920-1226
<< (e-mail address removed) >> (email)
<< TomCloyd.com >> (website & psychotherapy weblog)
<< sleightmind.wordpress.com >> (mental health issues weblog)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Todd Benson]

Because you did not start irb with -KU. Ruby defaults to -KN, and does
not do locale before 1.9 so you have to tell it you want to use utf-8.
It does not like umlauts when not using utf-8 otherwise it would just
use the identifier no matter how it is encoded (because anything is
valid ASCII8BIT).

You were responding to a slightly ignorant post and inside your
explanation you planted stuff like
"Actually, the developers of (Kubuntu) should be puzzled by your
thinking. Why would Windows be the perfect model for an OS. Newsflash!
It is not. Take off your Bill Gates -colored glasses!"
which sounds at least slightly like you are picking an argument here.

It would be nicer if you could limit flamewars by responding in more
civil manner.

To enlighten you as well I would like to pint out that installing
applications into separate folders is not specific to Windows XP and
Windows in general. But since you can google even things you have
never heard of (unlike the person to which you responded)

Umm ... are you referring to me? And which thread are you talking
about? I said registry in the other thread because I thought that was
where the environment variables were stored in XP. And if not in the
registry, then somewhere else besides the install directory and loaded
into the registry later.

Todd

 

[Michal Suchanek]

Umm ... are you referring to me? And which thread are you talking
about? I said registry in the other thread because I thought that was
where the environment variables were stored in XP. And if not in the
registry, then somewhere else besides the install directory and loaded
into the registry later.

No, I'm referring to Casimir who is quoted in that email to which you
are responding.

Thanks

Michal

 

[Todd Benson]

No, I'm referring to Casimir who is quoted in that email to which you

are responding.

Oh, I got confused on the "unlike the person to which you responded" part.

Thanks

Michal

Todd

 

[michael greenly]

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

(bit off topic)

There is actually a fairly sound logic to it and most of it can be divined
out of the file hierarchy standards by reading the descriptions if you were
interested. A lot of it is just historical baggage as well. I personally
think that in time people will come to rely on package management, search
functions, etc... and care much much less about where physical files are
actually stored.

We'll of course still care about meta relations ships... which package is
first in load order etc... but no so much where it's installed. I don't
navigate to any media type data any more. I desktop search to find it. I
don't go looking to see where things are installed I ask the package manager
etc...

By the way if you hadn't run across it 'dpkg -L packagename' will tell you
where things are.