[I posted this to the RVM group a few days ago, but haven't heard back.]
I could have sworn that when I first started using RVM (a few months ago),
each new login shell would activate my default Ruby. But now I see the system
one is active at first. Was I just imagining that the RVM code at the end of
.bashrc activated the default Ruby? Is there a way to make it do so? (I just
read that you shouldn't put 'rvm use ...' in system or profile .rvmrc, so I
don't want to just add 'rvm use default'.)
Also, I have MacRuby installed outside of RVM. I ran into a problem when I
installed some gems using macgem; apparently I had a non-system Ruby
activated, so RVM was telling macgem that my gem dir was an RVM one. Is that a
bug, or do I just have to make sure to do 'rvm use system' before interacting
with non-RVM Rubies?
Eric,
to set default interpreter use:
rvm --default use 1.9.2 # or whatever
and if you want to use the macruby, then i'm pretty sure you have to switch
to that ruby using `rvm use system` though i'm not on a mac so i can't be
sure about that one. maybe someone else knows??
hex
ยทยทยท
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Eric Christopherson < echristopherson@gmail.com> wrote:
[I posted this to the RVM group a few days ago, but haven't heard back.]
I could have sworn that when I first started using RVM (a few months ago),
each new login shell would activate my default Ruby. But now I see the
system
one is active at first. Was I just imagining that the RVM code at the end
of
.bashrc activated the default Ruby? Is there a way to make it do so? (I
just
read that you shouldn't put 'rvm use ...' in system or profile .rvmrc, so I
don't want to just add 'rvm use default'.)
Also, I have MacRuby installed outside of RVM. I ran into a problem when I
installed some gems using macgem; apparently I had a non-system Ruby
activated, so RVM was telling macgem that my gem dir was an RVM one. Is
that a
bug, or do I just have to make sure to do 'rvm use system' before
interacting
with non-RVM Rubies?
--
my blog is cooler than yours: serialhex.github.com
> Other than the fact Linux has a cool name, could someone explain why I
> should use Linux over BSD?
No. That's it. The cool name, that is. We worked very hard on
creating a name that would appeal to the majority of people, and it
certainly paid off: thousands of people are using linux just to be able
to say "OS/2? Hah. I've got Linux. What a cool name". 386BSD made the
mistake of putting a lot of numbers and weird abbreviations into the
name, and is scaring away a lot of people just because it sounds too
technical.
-- Linus Torvalds' follow-up to a question about Linux