News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on RVM vs Packaged Installation of Ruby in Production. Parent comment

Re:RVM vs Packaged Installation of Ruby in Production by brettweaverio on Wednesday February 15, 2012 @11:10PM (#3597348)
My concern has always been, ruby (or any other complex application) is going to compile differently on like but different systems.

Over long periods of time I'd be concerned that I could never recreate the 'same' Ruby 1.9.2 installation using RVM.

How can you address the concern of small changes being introduced when compiling against slightly different versions of development and runtime libraries?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:RVM vs Packaged Installation of Ruby in Production by mpapis on Wednesday February 15, 2012 @11:46PM (#3597420)
this might always happen, but considering the amount of opensource software and it's stability (when it's bug free) it should be considered stable and reproducible, compared system and RVM - both will be compiled - unless you save the compiled package and install it, but this can be done for both System and RVM
[ Parent | on HN ]