It'd be nice if we didn't have to go thru this at all. Given Ruby's installed with Mac OS X, and Apple's user base includes a lot of developers, I'd much prefer Apple install Ruby, Rails and a decent set of gems with Mac OS X.
I believe RubyGems is being integrated into Ruby 2.0 at the moment. So Mac OS X 10.5 will hopefully include all of these gems 'out of the box'.
But I certainly hope Apple do better supporting Ruby in 10.5 than they did with 10.4. Ruby's installed in a non-standard location, the readline module was missing (required for installing gems), and the author of the PDF::Writer module notes that images aren't rendered correctly because of Endian issues (Ruby in 10.4 was 'made' for Intel chips.)
I've sent Apple 'Mac OS X feedback' requesting better Ruby support in future Mac OS X releases and would encourage others to do so.
by Dale Gillard — Oct 11
I believe RubyGems is being integrated into Ruby 2.0 at the moment. So Mac OS X 10.5 will hopefully include all of these gems 'out of the box'.
But I certainly hope Apple do better supporting Ruby in 10.5 than they did with 10.4. Ruby's installed in a non-standard location, the readline module was missing (required for installing gems), and the author of the PDF::Writer module notes that images aren't rendered correctly because of Endian issues (Ruby in 10.4 was 'made' for Intel chips.)
I've sent Apple 'Mac OS X feedback' requesting better Ruby support in future Mac OS X releases and would encourage others to do so.