Where did ruby go?

[Josh Charles]

I just did a clean install of Suse 9.3 and was pleased to see that it
came with ruby already installed. However it was not the latest
version, but 1.8.1. Rails needs 1.8.2, so I downloaded the source and
ran ./configure, make, make install

All of those ran perfectly without errors. But when I run "ruby -v"
at the command line, I still get 1.8.1 as the version number. I
thought it just might be an issue with changing a symbolic link, but I
can find the binary for ruby 1.8.2 anywhere. I tried reading /
greping the make install output, but that just made my eyes water.

Where did it go? Am I missing a terribly easy step somewhere? I've
been developing on windows to avoid this sort of thing, but want to
make the leap here. Installing ruby on windows is so simple. But
then you also have all the other problems running on windows entails.

Thanks,
Josh

 

[Timothy Hunter]

I just did a clean install of Suse 9.3 and was pleased to see that it
came with ruby already installed. However it was not the latest
version, but 1.8.1. Rails needs 1.8.2, so I downloaded the source and
ran ./configure, make, make install

All of those ran perfectly without errors. But when I run "ruby -v"
at the command line, I still get 1.8.1 as the version number. I
thought it just might be an issue with changing a symbolic link, but I
can find the binary for ruby 1.8.2 anywhere. I tried reading /
greping the make install output, but that just made my eyes water.

Where did it go? Am I missing a terribly easy step somewhere? I've
been developing on windows to avoid this sort of thing, but want to
make the leap here. Installing ruby on windows is so simple. But
then you also have all the other problems running on windows entails.

Thanks,
Josh

Probably the version of Ruby that came with Suse is installed in
/usr/bin and the version you installed is in /usr/local/bin (try running
/usr/local/bin/ruby -v), and your $PATH is set so that /usr/bin precedes
/usr/local/bin. You can remove the /usr/bin version or change your $PATH
variable to make /usr/local/bin come first.

 

[Nicholas Van Weerdenburg]

I just did a clean install of Suse 9.3 and was pleased to see that it
came with ruby already installed. However it was not the latest
version, but 1.8.1. Rails needs 1.8.2, so I downloaded the source and
ran ./configure, make, make install
=20
All of those ran perfectly without errors. But when I run "ruby -v"
at the command line, I still get 1.8.1 as the version number. I
thought it just might be an issue with changing a symbolic link, but I
can find the binary for ruby 1.8.2 anywhere. I tried reading /
greping the make install output, but that just made my eyes water.
=20
Where did it go? Am I missing a terribly easy step somewhere? I've
been developing on windows to avoid this sort of thing, but want to
make the leap here. Installing ruby on windows is so simple. But
then you also have all the other problems running on windows entails.
=20
Thanks,
Josh
=20
=20

Usually works pretty well.

I think OS provided versus self-compiled rubies usually go into
different directorys. 1.8.2 is probably not in your path.

/usr/local/bin maybe?

--=20
Nicholas Van Weerdenburg

 

[Josh Charles]

Exactly what the problem was. It's fixed now. Thanks for the tip!

 

[Martin DeMello]

Where did it go? Am I missing a terribly easy step somewhere? I've
been developing on windows to avoid this sort of thing, but want to
make the leap here. Installing ruby on windows is so simple. But
then you also have all the other problems running on windows entails.

In addition to the /usr/bin vs /usr/local/bin problem, you should
probably have used suse's package manager to uninstall the old ruby
before installing the new one.

martin