I am facing issue when I am trying to work with rails 3.0.11. I initially worked with rails 3.2.6. Build a prototype application in Rails 3.2.6, Ruby 1.9.2 and gem 1.8.7. But then found, server on which we need to host is a shared server which can only support Rails 3.0.11, Ruby 1.8.7 and gem 1.7.2.
Hence I want to keep my dev environment exactly same before I ran into further issues. As I found there was some discrepancy in routes.rb of both the versions.
Steps I followed:
Uninstalled rails
Uninstalled ruby
Installed ruby from here.
This installed ruby version 1.8.7-p370 and gem 1.8.7
After this I installed rails by specifying version as 3.0.11
But still when I run command rails -v, it throws an error to me saying 'missing gem rails 3.2.6. Run bundle install to resolve the issue'
When I ran bundle install, it again completely installed rails 3.2.6 and problem remained unresolved.
Please suggest the clean way how shall I start my development on rails 3.0.11 without running into any issues?? Am I need to delete some registry or mapping in my system through which it is detecting rails 3.2.6 and creating issues??
Its urgent as I need to complete my dev by 7th September.
As I am new to stackexchange, please guide is it appropriate to ask question on the same related thread or shall I open new discussion for my problem?
#Gun - please note in response to one of your comments posted above - you DO need to change your Gemfile - if you are running rails -v from withing your project's directory, it will read the Gemfile.
There is a script located at script/rails - this is what runs when you run the rails command from the project directory. NOTE that this rails script requires your config/application.rb file - which in turn reads the Gemfile and bundles the referenced gems. Thus is your Gemfile still references 3.2.6, and it is not installed, rails -v will not work
Glad to hear the problem is fixed :)
As for the asset pipeline - if you are using rails 3.2.6 (or were using it) then you may have been using the asset pipeline to serve your assets (javascript files, CSS files, images, etc). If you were, and you downgrade to anything pre rails version 3.1, then anything being served through the asset pipeline will no longer work.
Here is a pretty good description of the asset pipeline: http://guides.rubyonrails.org/asset_pipeline.html
You should check also remove your Gemfile.lock or manually 'bundle update rails' when you change your rails dependency.
I suggest to use rbenv or rvm to create a virtual environment/sandbox where you can install your preferred ruby versions (e.g. 1.8.7) and keep tracking of your dependencies separately. This would save you a lot of effort.
Keep in mind that rails 3.0 has no asset pipeline support (it has been included in rails 3.1)! This is a very important difference and if you depend on it you will have big issues to solve for the downgrade.
Thanks a lot everyone for help.
I believe it was weird issue. I had heroku on the system. I was initially deploying my app on the same and then changed to another hosting server.
After uninstalling the heroku, it works perfectly fine. Probably, that was interfering somewhere. Although, not sure but problem is resolved.
Thanks a lot again for a great great help!!!
Meanwhile, I would request alup to throw some more light on asset pipeline support. Wots that? Could you please explain more??
Need to delete C:\Users\.ror folder and C:\Users\.gemfile and C:\Users\.gemfile.lock from your desktop..
Related
I've been following Mike Hartl's excellent Ruby on Rails Tutorial`.
I had to make some decisions earlier about versions for gem files and ruby. I decided (after some problems getting Heroku to work that I'd directly mimic the tutorial and versions of ruby described - leading me to go with rvm use 2.0.0 to set my version of ruby.
All was great on chapter one but now I'm getting an error message when i try to create a new rails project:
$ rails new demo_app
/home/huw/.rvm/rubies/ruby-2.0.0-p481/lib/ruby/site_ruby/2.0.0/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:55:in require': cannot load such file -- rails/cli (LoadError)
from /home/huw/.rvm/rubies/ruby-2.0.0-p481/lib/ruby/site_ruby/2.0.0/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:55:inrequire'
from /usr/bin/rails:9:in `'
I have no idea what that means... but as its referencing my ruby version I'm guessing that my rails and ruby versions are out of sync...
Could someone advise on possible courses of action?
I imagine possible options would be:
Reset my ruby version to the latest (but I don't know what clashes
that would create with gems!)
Downgrade from rails 4.1 to rails 4 (I believe that's Mike Hardl's version)
Force things through somehow
I'm a complete rails Noob however, and have no idea where to begin on any of those options - or if that error code even backs up my assumptions!
Forgive the "answer" but I don't have the rep to post a mere comment :-(
Have you tried looking at the RVM site? It has a troubleshooting page that may help you.
If not, have you tried get rvm stable and then typing in the rails new app_name command?
Other useful RVM commands are rvm list rubies and rvm gemset list. It may be the case that the ruby version you're using doesn't have rails for some reason.
As per zwippie's answer in the comment section, the solution was achieved as follows.
rails -v produced a very similar looking output to the error message above.
gem install rails after hanging for a second installed rails successfully. I am now able to add a new project.
I'm unsure why this has happened as I've been successfully making new rails projects both on this laptop and in this directory for the last two weeks, even up until this morning. However as zwippie notes perhaps this is an RVM setup issue. I'll go away and read up but if anyone had any additional pointers from documentation that might shed light on the issue I'm appreciate any links in the comment.
Many thanks all.
check for the rails is installed on your machine by the command bundle show rails.
If you get the version of rails and are still getting the above error, to resolve it you may have to use the command bundle exec before every rails command as in bundle exec rails s.
I upgraded to the latest Rails v3.1.3. And everything is fine, I'm able to run the 2.3 version of one website and the app for v3.1.3.
However I couldn't move it to a new machine, I installed all the required gems with
bundle install
and just cannot start Thin with the 2.3.2 version. I can only run the v3 apps. Thanks
Go read about RVM, and try to configure you machine according to the instructions given there.
As #Syed Aslam said the ideal way of doing is using RVM, but you may set bundler to your Rails 2.x project (because rails 3.x already have bundler..) and run both your projects in the same machine (actually currently I'm doing that).
Following is a tutorial how setting up bundle with Rails 2.x.
At work for internal Rails applications, the server is running Rails 2.0.4 and Ruby 1.86. As far as I know, that's not going to change anytime soon and I have no control over it. I was going to try and test this out between a couple of computers and was curious if anyone knew what would happen.
Being the server is on 2.0.4, I'd like to build Rails 2.3.5 applications for that server if at all possible. From what I understand so far, it won't be a problem if I freeze gems and upack dependancies. Does that sound right?
Also, the internal work server has no gems beyond what Rails installs. What I'm wondering is, if I can successfully run a 2.3.5 application on the 2.0.4 server, can I also use extra gems and unpack those to use even though the server doesn't have them? I know that it was version 2.1 that introduced Gem Dependencies so would a 2.3.5 Rails app running on a 2.0.4 server be able to use required gems that are unpacked into an application?
One of the worst things with this situation is even if the above stuff works, the server being on 1.86 would exclude me from using a lot of really cool gems that require Ruby 1.87 (like Formtastic).
Thanks
You can manually specify the version of Rails being used in the application in the conf/environment.rb file with the RAILS_GEM_VERSION variable.
You won't be able to gems that aren't installed on your server because the application won't be able to find the libraries.
I went ahead and did the leg work to test this out. If this helps anyone else:
Rails 2.3.5 will run fine on a 2.0.x server.
With Rails 2.1 or above, you can unpack gems and your app will work on a 2.0.x server (lower version server). These are the steps I took in order. The only thing unique here is the Rack version is specific to Rails 2.3.5 (and below). In version 2.3.6 and up they switched to rack 1.1. I'm sticking to 2.3.5 because of the Rack issues with 2.3.6 and up, like broken multipart uploads).
(inside your application directory).
rake rails:freeze:gems
rake gems:unpack:dependencies
(Create a Gems Folder in the vendor folder if it's not there)
(Navigate inside the gems folder: your_app\vendor\gems)
gem unpack rack -v="1.0.1"
(There should now be a folder called "rack-1.0.1" inside the gem folder)
(Navigate back out to your application root folder)
rake gems:refresh_specs
I tested this out using the authlogic gem - moving the project over to a spare laptop that only had Rails 2.0.4 installed and no other gems (except MySQL and Mongrel). The only thing I'm not sure about yet is if a gem that requires a script file be run for installation after the gem file (like Simple Forms) will work. I'm going to test that out next when I get time.
says if i develop a Ruby on Rails application using Rails 2.3.2, will that usually be compatible with Passenger on my hosting company?
If i ssh to my hosting company and type rails -v, i get 2.2.2... so looks like they might be using Rails 2.2.2.
So if i develop a Rails app on my Macbook and ftp all files over there, will the Passenger there usually work well with the generated code with the current version of Rails?
Freeze rails into vendor/rails using the built in rake task. That way your app will ue the version of rails you want it to no matter where you deploy it.
rake rails:freeze:gems
And the easiest way to do a specific version I know of.
rake rails:freeze:edge RELEASE=2.3.2.1
Now your version of rails will go with you where you send your app.
You can unpack other gem dependencies into vendor/gems for any gem you are using and want to be sure that it is available where ever you deploy the application.
rake gems:unpack
And to ensure their dependencies go to:
rake gems:unpack:dependencies
I would also suggest that you verify that they are running the latest version of passenger.
I would verify the version of Passenger they have installed (or confirm they have it installed at all). I would also suggest you freeze your version of Rails.
Just second something for railsninja's answer .
First say, it won't work straightaway.
Is that host a vps to you or have sudo access somehow?
If yes, I suggest you to do rake gems:install instead of gems:unpack, because some of gems are os dependent e.g (Rcov, RedCloth...etc.)
I will ask the hosting company of their passenger's configuration, the important question will be if they use RailsSpawnMethod: smart or smart-lv2(default).If they use the smart method, then it is a better idea to freeze your gems and rails otherwise will have the compatible issue as you can find reference from passenger user manual about the RailsSpawnMethod.
It will be nearly 100% compatible if you freeze your gems(all the gems need to be declared correctly in the environment.rb with config.gem, e.g(config.gem 'will_paginate',:source=>"http://gems.github.com")) and RAILS!!!!!
I have an older Rails app that I need to run. But I have the latest version of Rails.
When I try to run this older app it says:
Missing the Rails 1.99.0 gem. Please
gem install -v=1.99.0 rails
But when I run the command: gem install -v=1.99.0 rails
ERROR: could not find gem rails
locally or in a repository
Not sure what to do next. Could someone help me understand what's happening here?
And my second question, related to this problem is: It seems silly that I need to revert to an older version of Rails just to run this one legacy app - there must be a better way of doing this?
AFAIK, v1.99.0 is sort of a v2.0 prerelease, so you could try installing v2.0.x, changing the RAILS_GEM_VERSION in config/environment.rb and runing rake rails:update.
If you think about it, it's not as silly as it might seem at first. You make an app using a fast evolving web framework as RoR. Your choices are: continue developing your app at aproximately the same pace the framework is evolving, or freeze the rails gem (and evertything else your app depends on, like gems, plugins) into your app in order to make it less fragile to expecting gem updates.
Regarding the second question: yes it is silly. Fortunately the Rails team spotted that silliness and at some point they gave us the ability to "freeze" the versions of Rails libraries required by an application (and also specific gem versions) into the vendor directory.
To freeze your version of Rails:
rake rails:freeze:gems
There's a good blog post from a while back describing this.
Unless you install and deploy RVM, your installation will roll back your system rails installation, which will impact your other projects. If you want to manually administrate your development environment this way, you can uninstall rails first, and then install the desired version of rails for the current project.
But try to install your rails gem instead with this syntax:
sudo gem install rails -v 1.99.0