From: Todd Benson <caduceass@...>
Date: 2008-01-03T19:41:10+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby install on Kubuntu Linux - why so spread out

On Jan 3, 2008 4:17 AM, Tom Cloyd <tc@tomcloyd.com> wrote:
> 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
<wherever my ruby binaries are> /usr/local/bin/ruby.  It depends on
the machine though.

> 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