This might sound as a strange thing to do. Is there a bundler way to extract the bundled gems (from a Gemfile or from .bundle) and install them as system gems outside of the bundler context?
Something like bundle package, but instead of caching them in vendor/cache, installs them as system gems.
The new bundler does this by default
When you run bundle install your gems are installed to your BUNDLE_PATH (which defaults to ~/.bundle.
You can pass an argument specifying where you want to install your gems to; bundle install /usr/local/lib/bundle. From the user manual, "Further bundle commands or calls to Bundler.setup or Bundler.require will remember this location".
Of course, you'll need to use sudo to install to a system directory.
Is that what you're after?
Related
I used to have a new ruby installation for each new rails project, because it's impossible not to have conflicting gems with between two of them.
I have seen that 'bundle package' command could freeze a project specific set of gems in the 'vendr/cache' directory.
I though it wouldn't install them globally, just store them in that directory.
However, when i did it, 'bundle package' ended up installing (globally) the gems before storing them in 'vendor/cache' folder.
Did I do something wrong? Is it a bug?
From the Bundler docs:
The package command will copy the .gem files for your gems in the bundle into ./vendor/cache.
As far as I can tell, Bundler does not handle installing gems, it passes that off to the gem command. What Bundler does is to make sure that you have the right version of the gem activated. So even when you package the gems, when you later install them it'll take those gems and install them "globally".
So, to answer your question: No, you didn't do anything wrong and this is not a bug but the intended behaviour.
This seems to happen a lot. I run bundle update or bundle install and for one reason or another I often get something like this:
You have already activated kgio 2.8.0, but your Gemfile requires kgio
2.7.4. Using bundle exec may solve this
I then have to go and run: sudo gem uninstall kgio and select kgio 2.8.0 to uninstall it.
Why does bundler even update the gem if it knows my gemfile locks those gems to a specific version. I NEVER install gems outside of the gemfile and bundler so Im not circumventing its conventions. I do have another project on my machine, but I havent ran a bunle update on that project in a long time -- is there some mix up there? Has this happened to anyone else? Am I doing something wrong?
actually bundle update the gems specified (all gems, if none are specified), ignoring the previously installed gems specified in the Gemfile.lock.
whereas bundle install will fetch all remote sources, but use the dependencies specified in the Gemfile.lock instead of resolving dependencies.
and use
gem cleanup
This command will remove (uninstall) all the versions of a gem, except for the latest one.
bundle update, installs newer versions of your gems and states that in your Gemfile.lock. bundle install just makes sure you have the correct versions installed. I suppose you are running bundle install in projects with different locked versions for kgio.
It seems when I run bundle package then bundle install --local then I run unicorn_rails, unicorn is still accessing system gems. I keep getting :
You have already activated rack 1.5.2, but your Gemfile requires rack
1.2.8. Using bundle exec may solve this.
And it shouldn't because rack 1.2.8 is in the vendor/cache.
bundle exec wont work because it seems to be a resource hog and the whole point of bundle package is avoid this whole mess in the first place.
So how do I get unicorn to get bundle environment to only use the vendor/cache gems?
bundle install --local takes gems in vendor/local and installs them using whatever your default gem command does. By default, that is a system-wide install. If you're using RVM or something else, it'll be in your current RVM gemset.
If you're installing in production, and you want to limit the app to your gems from vendor/local, you want to do bundle install --deployment. This will install the gems into vendor/bundle and set Bundler up to use those gems (and only those gems, not the system ones). If the gems aren't in vendor/local, it will download them. It won't update your Gemfile.lock, and best practice is to keep all your gems in vendor/cache up to date to prevent it from even trying to download gems.
You don't need to use bundle exec unless you're running a binary from one of the gems. If you're running rails server and having this problem, the reason is that the rails command is running from the shell's $PATH. It's presumably a different version of Rails than the one you'd like to use.
If that's the case, your options are to track down the path to the version of rails you want and run it explicitly, to use bundle exec, or to run bundle install --binstubs --deployment and add that bin directory to your PATH. I haven't noticed any overhead from bundle exec, but if you're concerned about that and still want to scope everything to your bundle, then use --binstubs (this is how Heroku does it, by the way).
We are deploying our apps as RPM linux packages (with all the dependencies also packaged in RPMs). It turns out that bundler is problematic in this situation and it only complicates our build process - we would like to get rid of it.
Is it possible to run Rails 3 app without it forcing Ruby to use system rubygems? How?
In the book Rails 3 Way there is a statement describing that the easiest way to remove Bundler is to delete Gemfile* files. That's it. It just works.
You could install all gems manually using gem install gemname. In your situation or if you do not have sudo rights it is perhaps recommendable to install the gem files locally in your user directory using
gem install --user-install gemname
You can also install your gems locally with bundler:
bundle install --path ~/.gem
I'm pretty new to Ruby/Rails but I was taking a look at bundler and was wondering how it works exactly. Do you install a full set of gems like normal gem install XYZand then use the Gemfile to pull a certain subset of those gems for use with a specific application? Or do you not install gems normally anymore and just include them in the Gemfile and then do a bundle install to include them all in a bundle that is then used with your application?
Thank you so much for taking the time to answer this, I'm just a little confused on what bundler's functionality is exactly.
-- MAP
These two links explain everything about bundler.
How does bundler bundle
How does bundle require gems
Think of bundler as a package management tool.
From bundle help command:
bundle install # Install the current environment to the system
bundle package # Locks and then caches all of the gems into vendor/cache
So bundle install command will install all gems to the system that are listed in Gemfile as well as their dependencies. If the gem was not previously installed it will grab it from the gemcutter repo. bundle package will cache the .gem files into your apps vendor/cache directory.
No need to run gem install first.