[BioRuby] Ruby installation

[Joachim Baran]

Hey!

  I wholeheartedly disagree. :)

  I had to use rvm beforehand, because Ruby installations were a mess.
However, with the newest Mac OS X I find that the up-to-date Ruby
interpreter works really well -- including the gem system. MacPorts also
installed some Ruby versions in its /opt hierarchy, but those are at the
end of my $PATH and get ignored.

  On Linux I usually just pick the latest Ruby interpreter and that works
then. Having said that, my Linux VMs usually do not last very long (purged
after the job is done), so I do not know how great the Linux eco-system
maintains versioning.

  So, from my perspective, Ruby is the easy choice that works
out-of-the-box.

Kim


On 28 April 2014 22:14, Pjotr Prins <pjotr.public14 at thebird.nl> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> It used to be that Ruby was easy to install.
>
> But the last years I find people are having real trouble installing
> Ruby and gems. I also run into odd annoyances, even if I can handle
> rvm myself. I am running into this because I am teaching people to use
> my gems :). I think it is too hard for a language that is supposed to
> be easy.
>
> Anyone disagree?
>
> Can we develop a best practise protocol that works for our gems at
> least on all Linux distributions? What would be the best way? And
> maybe we can extend to OSX and Windows later.
>
> Homebrew would be nice, but it needs a good Ruby to bootstrap. RVM is
> too tricky.
>
> Do we need to build from source, perhaps? Or start using GUIX?
>
> Any suggestions other then use my 'favorite' distribution are welcome.
>
> Pj.
> _______________________________________________
> BioRuby Project - http://www.bioruby.org/
> BioRuby mailing list
> BioRuby at lists.open-bio.org
> http://lists.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/bioruby
>