2

I've seen all over the place people using RVM/rbenv to install the most updated version of Ruby on Linux. On development, I understand that it may be OK to do this, but I can't understand why would I do this on a production server instead of using the Ruby version on the package manager of the distro.

Are there any downsides of using the most updated version of Rails (4.2) with Ruby's version of Debian's package manager (currently 2.1)?

My goals here are to be as stable and as secure as possible, I don't care about the shiny new stuff.

4

It's so easy for Devs to switch rubies, so ruby developers tend to use the last shiny thing that came out the month that they starts coding something.

Also ruby is so active and so young that there's plenty of stuff that just don't work with the default packaged ruby.

So you can ask your Devs if they can keep things running with the Debian default's ruby (the sysadmin way of living) or work with them to try to fullfill its requirements (the devops way of living)

If you choose the path of good karma and harder work you can fight with rbenv / rvm stuff in production (I really don't like that, but it's personal) or you can just build the desired ruby in a /local/ path with ruby-build and pin Debian's package sistem to never install ruby or similar software.

You could also find unnoficial packages for modern rubies like the ones in BrightBox or package it yourself.

Unnoficial rubies (for the debian release) are safe and stable and faster than their older official alternatives, as long they are stable ruby releases.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.