# Updating gems for ruby 1.9 **URL:** \ **Category:** ruby-talk\ **Created:** [29 August 2009 14:54 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/updating-gems-for-ruby-1-9/55135 "2009-08-29T14:54:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Samuel\_Williams](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/db5fbb/32.png) [@Samuel\_Williams](https://rubytalk.org/u/Samuel_Williams)\ **Post date:** [29 August 2009 14:54 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/updating-gems-for-ruby-1-9/55135/1 "2009-08-29T14:54:51Z")
Hi, This might have been discussed somewhere else already, if this is the case, I apologize. I publish a significant number of gems. These were all designed for Ruby 1.8. Apart from syntax and functional changes, how to I ensure that it is possible to use these gems with Ruby 1.9? I haven't really used Ruby 1.9 much, but when I install a gem, it seems like it is installed for a particular version of Ruby.. on my Mac:   /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8 Does this mean that the gem command that you use will determine where the gems are installed? Is there a different gem command for 1.8 and for 1.9? I use the gem server to publish my gems. Do I need to use the 1.9 version of gem server in order to provide gems for Ruby 1.9? (I'm assuming I probably don't, but it would be good to clarify). Provided everything is working okay, should I be using Ruby 1.9 gem server for publishing gems to both Ruby 1.8 and Ruby 1.9? When I stand back a little bit, this seems fairly complicated - maybe more so than it needs to be. Any clarification would be most welcome. Kind regards, Samuel ---
**Author:** ![Thomas\_P](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8797f3/32.png) [@Thomas\_P](https://rubytalk.org/u/Thomas_P)\ **Post date:** [29 August 2009 18:02 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/updating-gems-for-ruby-1-9/55135/2 "2009-08-29T18:02:40Z")
> Hi, > > This might have been discussed somewhere else already, if this is the case, > I apologize. > > I publish a significant number of gems. These were all designed for Ruby > 1.8. Apart from syntax and functional changes, how to I ensure that it is > possible to use these gems with Ruby 1.9? you don't have to do anything special. If your gems (and all dependent gems) work with ruby 1.9 everything is fine. > I haven't really used Ruby 1.9 much, but when I install a gem, it seems > like it is installed for a particular version of Ruby.. on my Mac: > >        /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8 > > Does this mean that the gem command that you use will determine where the > gems are installed? yes. rubygems use different places to store the gems - depending on your Ruby version. > Is there a different gem command for 1.8 and for 1.9? no. -Thomas > **···** > > 2009/8/29 Space Ship Traveller \ > > -- > Thomas Preymesser > thopre@gmail.com > > > **[Google Sites: Sign-in](https://accounts.google.com/v3/signin/identifier?continue=https%3A%2F%2Fsites.google.com%2Fsite%2Fsites%2Fsystem%2Ferrors%2FWebspaceNotFound%3Fpath%3D%2Fthopre%2F&followup=https%3A%2F%2Fsites.google.com%2Fsite%2Fsites%2Fsystem%2Ferrors%2FWebspaceNotFound%3Fpath%3D%2Fthopre%2F&ifkv=ASKXGp00xKzvSKtBU6j_9DAzYvUV4ow3hQgqNyg87df0PKMI-EJz0njOhwetboPoG--MYJ46SdBd&passive=1209600&service=jotspot&flowName=WebLiteSignIn&flowEntry=ServiceLogin&dsh=S-1257387901%3A1707023865178726)** > > > > Access Google Sites with a personal Google account or Google Workspace account (for business use). > > > **[thopre](https://thopre.wordpress.com/)** > > > > Entwicklungen für die Bühne des Lebens > > Pablo Picasso\<[http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/p/pablo\_picasso.html>](http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/p/pablo_picasso.html>); > - "Computers are useless. They can only give you answers." ---
**Author:** ![Samuel\_Williams](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/db5fbb/32.png) [@Samuel\_Williams](https://rubytalk.org/u/Samuel_Williams)\ **Post date:** [29 August 2009 18:10 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/updating-gems-for-ruby-1-9/55135/3 "2009-08-29T18:10:11Z")
Thanks. If the gem doesn't need to be changed between versions of ruby, why is it installed into a version dependent sub-directory? Is it possible to install a gem for all versions of ruby? Kind regards, Samuel ---
**Author:** ![Eric\_Hodel1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a9adbd/32.png) [@Eric\_Hodel1](https://rubytalk.org/u/Eric_Hodel1)\ **Post date:** [31 August 2009 23:06 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/updating-gems-for-ruby-1-9/55135/4 "2009-08-31T23:06:05Z")
yes\* \* If your ruby 1.9 installation was configured with --program-suffix, this suffix will be used to determine the gem command's name. For example ./configure --program-suffix=19 gives you ruby19 and gem19. You'll probably also want to set --format-executable in ~/.gemrc (see gem help env). > **···** > > On Aug 29, 2009, at 11:02, Thomas Preymesser wrote: > > > > Is there a different gem command for 1.8 and for 1.9? > > > > no. ---
**Author:** ![Eric\_Hodel1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a9adbd/32.png) [@Eric\_Hodel1](https://rubytalk.org/u/Eric_Hodel1)\ **Post date:** [31 August 2009 23:06 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/updating-gems-for-ruby-1-9/55135/5 "2009-08-31T23:06:40Z")
Not by default. You can set GEM\_HOME and GEM\_PATH to force RubyGems to use a common path. See gem help env. > **···** > > On Aug 29, 2009, at 11:10, Space Ship Traveller wrote: > > > Is it possible to install a gem for all versions of ruby? ---
**Author:** ![Samuel\_Williams](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/db5fbb/32.png) [@Samuel\_Williams](https://rubytalk.org/u/Samuel_Williams)\ **Post date:** [3 September 2009 03:32 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/updating-gems-for-ruby-1-9/55135/6 "2009-09-03T03:32:55Z")
Out of curiosity, why was this decision made? It seems like it would be easier to have a combined directory for 1.8 and 1.9? Kind regards, Samuel > **···** > > On 1/09/2009, at 11:06 AM, Eric Hodel wrote: > > > On Aug 29, 2009, at 11:10, Space Ship Traveller wrote: > > > > > Is it possible to install a gem for all versions of ruby? > > > > Not by default. > > > > You can set GEM\_HOME and GEM\_PATH to force RubyGems to use a common path. See gem help env. ---
**Author:** ![Eric\_Hodel1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a9adbd/32.png) [@Eric\_Hodel1](https://rubytalk.org/u/Eric_Hodel1)\ **Post date:** [3 September 2009 04:56 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/updating-gems-for-ruby-1-9/55135/7 "2009-09-03T04:56:12Z")
C extensions can only be linked against one version. > **···** > > On Sep 2, 2009, at 20:32, Space Ship Traveller wrote: > > > On 1/09/2009, at 11:06 AM, Eric Hodel wrote: > > On Aug 29, 2009, at 11:10, Space Ship Traveller wrote: > > > > > > Is it possible to install a gem for all versions of ruby? > > > > > > Not by default. > > > > > > You can set GEM\_HOME and GEM\_PATH to force RubyGems to use a common path. See gem help env. > > > > Out of curiosity, why was this decision made? It seems like it would be easier to have a combined directory for 1.8 and 1.9? ---
**Author:** ![Samuel\_Williams](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/db5fbb/32.png) [@Samuel\_Williams](https://rubytalk.org/u/Samuel_Williams)\ **Post date:** [3 September 2009 05:34 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/updating-gems-for-ruby-1-9/55135/8 "2009-09-03T05:34:00Z")
Thats a good reason 🙂 maybe? I can understand why it is that way. Thanks for the clarification I appreciate your knowledge. Samuel > **···** > > On 3/09/2009, at 4:56 PM, Eric Hodel wrote: > > > On Sep 2, 2009, at 20:32, Space Ship Traveller wrote: > > > > > On 1/09/2009, at 11:06 AM, Eric Hodel wrote: > > > On Aug 29, 2009, at 11:10, Space Ship Traveller wrote: > > > > > > > > Is it possible to install a gem for all versions of ruby? > > > > > > > > Not by default. > > > > > > > > You can set GEM\_HOME and GEM\_PATH to force RubyGems to use a common path. See gem help env. > > > > > > Out of curiosity, why was this decision made? It seems like it would be easier to have a combined directory for 1.8 and 1.9? > > > > C extensions can only be linked against one version.