[ruby-core:38951] Re: Why Ruby has versioned paths?

On 11/08/11 at 04:26 +0900, Luis Lavena wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 4:13 PM, V咜 Ondruch <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > But for every case you have mentioned, I would prefer to install into
> > location with different prefix, e.g. /opt/ruby18 and /opt/ruby19 so the
> > version numbers are useless. So again, I am wondering if somebody mixes Ruby
> > 1.8 and Ruby 1.9 into one folder in reality, not if that is possible in
> > theory.
> >
> >
> 
> Problem with that is LSB and folder structure, /usr/bin or
> /usr/local/bin could be shared by two version of ruby, one with suffix
> (e.g.: ruby and ruby19)
> 
> So both share /usr/lib or /usr/local/lib and because of that,
> versioned folder structure matters.
> 
> I've seen this with some Debian packages while back, cannot remember
> the exact versions.

It's still the case as of today (ruby1.8 and ruby1.9.1 binaries, with a
'ruby' symlink managed via update-alternatives that points to the
(locally) preferred version.

While RVM is clearly a useful tool for developers, I don't think that it
should be pushed as the default or standard way to install Ruby.

Lucas