>>
>> I put the bindir into the PATH. Kind of hacky but it works.
>>
>
> What exactly do you mean here? Can you elaborate?
I mean I did at export
PATH=/usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/puppet-0.25.0/sbin/;$PATH
I suppose an alias would have worked just as well to start with.
--~--~-~--~
2009/9/10 Tim Uckun :
>
>>
>> There is a problem with how Gems handle binaries - Puppet has binaries
>> in the bin and sbin directories in line with the FHS. Gems do not
>> understand the concept of a binary directory other than "bindir"
>> (usually "bin"). So binaries in the sbin directory are
> Perhaps someone who likes gems can dive in there and propose a patch
> since upstream doesn't have much time for it?
You know the more I think about this the more I am convinced creating
a yum or apt repository is a better way to go.
Right now on ubuntu I can do a apt-get install puppet
and
Tim Uckun wrote:
> Just a heads up.
>
> If you do a gem install puppet it does not create the entries into
> the proper directories.
In addition to what James said, here's the upstream RubyGems bug
(filed by some Luke Kanies guy a little more than 2 years ago):
http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.
>
> There is a problem with how Gems handle binaries - Puppet has binaries
> in the bin and sbin directories in line with the FHS. Gems do not
> understand the concept of a binary directory other than "bindir"
> (usually "bin"). So binaries in the sbin directory are not installed.
> I am workin
2009/9/10 Tim Uckun :
>
> Just a heads up.
>
> If you do a gem install puppet it does not create the entries into the
> proper directories.
>
> Running install.rb from the tar file does.
There is a problem with how Gems handle binaries - Puppet has binaries
in the bin and sbin directories in line
