[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

[HELP] No such file to load -- rubygems

pere.noel

12/29/2005 1:36:00 PM

i've installed ruby 1.8.4 (on MacOS X 10.4.3) in /usr/local

when i want to update the system :
sudo gem update --system
i get the following error message :
ruby: No such file to load -- rubygems (LoadError)

i've set some env vars :
% echo $RUBYOPT
-rrubygems
% echo $GEM_HOME
/usr/local
then, i'm stuck...
--
une bévue
53 Answers

Tim Hunter

12/29/2005 1:53:00 PM

0

Une bévue wrote:
> i've installed ruby 1.8.4 (on MacOS X 10.4.3) in /usr/local
>
> when i want to update the system :
> sudo gem update --system
> i get the following error message :
> ruby: No such file to load -- rubygems (LoadError)
>
> i've set some env vars :
> % echo $RUBYOPT
> -rrubygems
> % echo $GEM_HOME
> /usr/local
> then, i'm stuck...

Looks like you need to install Rubygems.

pere.noel

12/29/2005 1:58:00 PM

0

Une bévue <pere.noel@laponie.com> wrote:

> when i want to update the system :
> sudo gem update --system
> i get the following error message :
> ruby: No such file to load -- rubygems (LoadError)

this is because of my PATH :
%which ruby
/usr/bin/ruby //the default install on MacOS X
changing the PATH order, makes it ok ))
--
une bévue

Jim Weirich

12/29/2005 2:04:00 PM

0

unknown wrote:
> i've installed ruby 1.8.4 (on MacOS X 10.4.3) in /usr/local
>
> when i want to update the system :
> sudo gem update --system
> i get the following error message :
> ruby: No such file to load -- rubygems (LoadError)
>
> i've set some env vars :
> % echo $RUBYOPT
> -rrubygems
> % echo $GEM_HOME
> /usr/local
> then, i'm stuck...

Obvious question ... have you installed rubygems into the new Ruby
instance? It looks like you might have a gems install hanging around
from an earlier version of Ruby (i.e. it is finding the "gem" command),
but its not finding the rubygems.rb library.

--
-- Jim Weirich



--
Posted via http://www.ruby-....

pere.noel

12/29/2005 2:11:00 PM

0

Timothy Hunter <cyclists@nc.rr.com> wrote:

> Looks like you need to install Rubygems.
right and not right ))
not right because i've allready installed rubygems.
however only for ruby in /usr/local
on macos x their is a "builtin" ruby 1.8.2
and the PATH gaves the default ruby, i've changed the order for the path
and that's ok, /usr/local/bin/ruby is choosen...

--
une bévue

pere.noel

12/29/2005 2:16:00 PM

0

Jim Weirich <jim@weirichhouse.org> wrote:

> Obvious question ... have you installed rubygems into the new Ruby
> instance? It looks like you might have a gems install hanging around
> from an earlier version of Ruby (i.e. it is finding the "gem" command),
> but its not finding the rubygems.rb library.

thanks i found it !
the default ruby wasn't the latest one ))
where i did install rubygems...
i had only to change the PATH from :
export PATH=PATH:/usr/local/bin:/Users/yvon/bin
to :
export PATH=/usr/local/bin:/Users/yvon/bin:PATH
now i get /usr/local/bin/ruby (the latest 1.8.4)...


--
une bévue

R. Hill

2/14/2008 11:08:00 PM

0

On Feb 14, 8:51 pm, Out_Of_The_Dark <xscilentolog...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Feb 14, 5:25 pm, Rev Dennis L Erlich <infor...@informer.org> wrote:
>
> Keep it up. You just prove over and over again just who you are here
> on behalf of.

I'm unconvinced by the emeter-endorphin theory too. A theory must also
take into account what it doesn't explain. And this one doesn't
explain a lot of other things, few examples:

* There are other destructive cults out there, the members don't use
electricity (example: "flying planes into skyscrapers")
* There are many addictions which have been found to cause changes in
the brain, and no electricity is involved
* I remember posting a *very long time* ago a couple of articles from
pubmed *not* supporting this theory. Any honest assessment of a theory
must *also* find a way to include the contradicting observations
* A discussion about a particular theory must also assess and present
alternative explanations
* As someone else noted, how come people are not addicted to holding
two cans alone? If it were intrinsically addictive, it's reasonable to
think there would already be such an addiction
* I have a problem when a *theory* is presented as if it were a fact
("Scientology's Biggest Secret")
* [add here all other points sceptics have presented which are not
covered above]

I have too much respect in scientific truth, it makes me cringe when
the modesty intrinsic to genuine scientific exploration is absent.

Ray.

Henri Ladd

2/15/2008 2:31:00 AM

0

R. Hill wrote:

> On Feb 14, 8:51 pm, Out_Of_The_Dark <xscilentolog...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>On Feb 14, 5:25 pm, Rev Dennis L Erlich <infor...@informer.org> wrote:
>>
>>Keep it up. You just prove over and over again just who you are here
>>on behalf of.
>
>
> I'm unconvinced by the emeter-endorphin theory too. A theory must also
> take into account what it doesn't explain. And this one doesn't
> explain a lot of other things, few examples:
>
> * There are other destructive cults out there, the members don't use
> electricity (example: "flying planes into skyscrapers")
> * There are many addictions which have been found to cause changes in
> the brain, and no electricity is involved

Electricity is always found in the brain. It is how the nerves fire.
You knew that right? You know what an electolyte is right?


> * I remember posting a *very long time* ago a couple of articles from
> pubmed *not* supporting this theory. Any honest assessment of a theory
> must *also* find a way to include the contradicting observations
> * A discussion about a particular theory must also assess and present
> alternative explanations
> * As someone else noted, how come people are not addicted to holding
> two cans alone? If it were intrinsically addictive, it's reasonable to
> think there would already be such an addiction
> * I have a problem when a *theory* is presented as if it were a fact
> ("Scientology's Biggest Secret")
> * [add here all other points sceptics have presented which are not
> covered above]
>
> I have too much respect in scientific truth, it makes me cringe when
> the modesty intrinsic to genuine scientific exploration is absent.
>
> Ray.

R. Hill

2/15/2008 2:54:00 AM

0

On Feb 15, 12:31 am, Henri Ladd <hen...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> R. Hill wrote:

<snip>

> > I'm unconvinced by the emeter-endorphin theory too. A theory must also
> > take into account what it doesn't explain. And this one doesn't
> > explain a lot of other things, few examples:
>
> > * There are other destructive cults out there, the members don't use
> > electricity (example: "flying planes into skyscrapers")
> > * There are many addictions which have been found to cause changes in
> > the brain, and no electricity is involved
>
> Electricity is always found in the brain. It is how the nerves fire.
> You knew that right? You know what an electolyte is right?

Assuming for an instant I would answer "no" to your question, would
that make my comments invalid?

Ray.

<snip>

John Dorsay

2/15/2008 3:31:00 AM

0

Henri Ladd wrote:
> R. Hill wrote:
>
>> On Feb 14, 8:51 pm, Out_Of_The_Dark <xscilentolog...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Feb 14, 5:25 pm, Rev Dennis L Erlich <infor...@informer.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Keep it up. You just prove over and over again just who you are here
>>> on behalf of.
>>
>>
>> I'm unconvinced by the emeter-endorphin theory too. A theory must also
>> take into account what it doesn't explain. And this one doesn't
>> explain a lot of other things, few examples:
>>
>> * There are other destructive cults out there, the members don't use
>> electricity (example: "flying planes into skyscrapers")
>> * There are many addictions which have been found to cause changes in
>> the brain, and no electricity is involved
>
> Electricity is always found in the brain. It is how the nerves fire.
> You knew that right? You know what an electolyte is right?

You know that neurotransmission is by neuroexcitation, not by
electron flow, right? You know what neuroexcitation is, right?


John

Henri Ladd

2/15/2008 4:30:00 AM

0

John Dorsay wrote:
> Henri Ladd wrote:
>
>> R. Hill wrote:
>>
>>> On Feb 14, 8:51 pm, Out_Of_The_Dark <xscilentolog...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Feb 14, 5:25 pm, Rev Dennis L Erlich <infor...@informer.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Keep it up. You just prove over and over again just who you are here
>>>> on behalf of.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm unconvinced by the emeter-endorphin theory too. A theory must also
>>> take into account what it doesn't explain. And this one doesn't
>>> explain a lot of other things, few examples:
>>>
>>> * There are other destructive cults out there, the members don't use
>>> electricity (example: "flying planes into skyscrapers")
>>> * There are many addictions which have been found to cause changes in
>>> the brain, and no electricity is involved
>>
>>
>> Electricity is always found in the brain. It is how the nerves fire.
>> You knew that right? You know what an electolyte is right?
>
>
> You know that neurotransmission is by neuroexcitation, not by electron
> flow, right? You know what neuroexcitation is, right?
>
>
> John

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,8741...

How Nerves Work

Every muscular function of the human body is triggered by a small
electrical current transmitted to the muscles through the nerves.
Doctors have long assumed that a chemical reaction at the synapses (the
junctions between nerves) causes the impulses to flow through the nerves
until?through junction after junction?they reach the muscles. But the
chemistry of impulse transmission along the nerve fibers was not known.
Last week Columbia University announced that Dr. David Nachmansohn and
his colleagues in the university's Department of Neurology had found new
evidence to support his 20-year-old theory of the biochemical reaction

By isolating a "receptor" protein, the Columbia biochemists proved that
the same reaction that takes place at the synapse is repeated all along
the length of the nerve. When a nerve is stimulated, a chemical called
acetylcholine is released within the nerve. It combines with the
receptor protein, causing an interchange of sodium and potassium ions.
The ions in turn trigger release of more acetylcholine a bit farther
along the line, letting the current advance. To turn off the signal, an
enzyme, cholinesterase, is released that instantly destroys the
acetylcholine in the nerve.

[...]