5 ms·

Install Ruby 2.1, Rails and Passenger on Ubuntu

johnatwork 13y ago
This write up is something that I've been looking for. Some folks at the local Rails meetups have also told me about Dokku, which facilitates deployment for sure, but I'm left wondering what the ramifications/disadvantages of an automated process (like Dokku and I guess Heroku) vs a "proper" setup like this one described.
ksec 13y ago
One of those site that doesn't work if you block Google Analytics.
digitalsushi 13y ago
I can attest that the ruby-build project is a huge lifesaver. If you need to build an experimental ruby, it's the way to go. You can install it completely out of the system path. I really appreciate the effort that was put into it because it probably saved me about a week of work.
noelherrick 13y ago
I never knew about CheckInstall: a utility that tracks all the files modified during "make install" and creates a Debian package for them. That's just great! Bonus: you can then use the package it creates to install on other machines. https://help.ubuntu.com/community/CheckInstall https://help.ubuntu.com/community/CheckInstall
FooBarWidget 13y ago
Rather than installing Ruby 2.1 from source using rbenv, it is also possible to install Ruby 2.1 using APT, by using the Brightbox PPA: https://launchpad.net/~brightbox/+archive/ruby-ng https://launchpad.net/~brightbox/+archive/ruby-ng The Phusion Passenger APT packages are compatible with the Brightbox Ruby packages.
- vivab0rg 13y ago
  This. I'm so grateful to Brightbox for having relieved me from the rvm/rbenv madness. Same painless packages on both development and production. Priceless.
werdnapk 13y ago
I find chruby (https://github.com/postmodern/chruby https://github.com/postmodern/chruby) to be a much nicer alternative to rbenv nowadays.
- hiphopyo 13y ago
  I can definitely vouch for that.
comice 13y ago
Bad firewalling advice imo. Use ubuntu's ufw. Admittedl, ufw feels more difficult if you already know iptables, but it's way more robust than the example given there.
- phazmatis 13y ago
  Would it have made this guide longer? If so, you're adding unnecessary complexity for what it essentially a beginner guide (says so in the title).
  - comice 13y ago
    It would have made it shorter, and much simpler. Only iptables nerds will find ufw harder.
hiphopyo 13y ago
Choose OpenBSD for your Unix needs. OpenBSD -- the world's simplest and most secure Unix-like OS. The world's most used SSH implementation OpenSSH, the world's most elegant firewall PF, the world's most elegant mail server OpenSMTPD. OpenBSD -- the cleanest kernel, the cleanest userland and the cleanest configuration syntax. Also, http://puma.io/ http://puma.io/.
- oblio 13y ago
  This sounds like a bad spam post.
  - hiphopyo 13y ago
    With Linux, it's lot of beating around the bush. Overcomplicated config files, a lot of disabling and removing of things one don't need, having to deal with a messy and outdated firewall. With OpenBSD, I'd just have to change a few config file lines and lo and behold have one of the most secure and well-thought out servers the world has ever seen. Also, with the existence of Puma, I don't see why anybody would want to use Passenger.
    - FooBarWidget 13y ago
      At least with Linux I don't have to wait 6 hours for all my software to finish compiling. Think about all the trees that are unnecessarily cut down because of all that compiling. And support for Linux is much easier to get than support for OpenBSD. Also, this is why anybody would want to use Passenger over Puma: https://github.com/phusion/passenger/wiki/Puma-vs-Phusion-Passenger https://github.com/phusion/passenger/wiki/Puma-vs-Phusion-Pa... (or vice versa, for that matter) TLDR: Passenger takes a more holistic and integrated approach and is a lot easier to use. It has superior management and administration tools, superior robustness features, superior security features (e.g. sandboxing through user switching), better documentation, uses less memory, etc.
      - hiphopyo 13y ago
        OpenBSD doesn't require compiling, it has precompiled packages just like Linux. Yes, support for Linux is much more wide-spread, but that's due to marketing and not the quality of the OSes themselves. As for Passenger vs Puma, no management and administration tool is more superior than the Unix commandline. Plus, you don't need fancy sandboxing features assuming your OS user account is properly secured in the first place. You mention superior this and that, but I find it all hard to swallow as I know you guys go around spamming Puma-related articles and tutorials with stuff about Passenger.
sandGorgon 13y ago
So I see a lot of guides like this (I have one myself), but none that are built on top of Chef-solo/Ansible/Knife. Which makes me wonder, which is the correct way which lends itself to automation and doesn't depend on AWS/AMI?
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
pkallberg 13y ago
That's a great guide! We realized that a lot of people were spending a lot of time on stuff like this, and that's why we built Cloud 66. We help you to deploy and manage your applications on any cloud (ie. DigitalOcean, AWS, Rackspace etc) - feel free to check us out http://cloud66.com http://cloud66.com Disclaimer: I work for Cloud 66

This write up is something that I've been looking for. Some folks at the local Rails meetups have also told me about Dokku, which facilitates deployment for sure, but I'm left wondering what the ramifications/disadvantages of an automated process (like Dokku and I guess Heroku) vs a "proper" setup like this one described.

ksec 13y ago

One of those site that doesn't work if you block Google Analytics.

digitalsushi 13y ago

I can attest that the ruby-build project is a huge lifesaver. If you need to build an experimental ruby, it's the way to go. You can install it completely out of the system path. I really appreciate the effort that was put into it because it probably saved me about a week of work.

noelherrick 13y ago

I never knew about CheckInstall: a utility that tracks all the files modified during "make install" and creates a Debian package for them. That's just great! Bonus: you can then use the package it creates to install on other machines. https://help.ubuntu.com/community/CheckInstall https://help.ubuntu.com/community/CheckInstall

FooBarWidget 13y ago

Rather than installing Ruby 2.1 from source using rbenv, it is also possible to install Ruby 2.1 using APT, by using the Brightbox PPA: https://launchpad.net/~brightbox/+archive/ruby-ng https://launchpad.net/~brightbox/+archive/ruby-ng The Phusion Passenger APT packages are compatible with the Brightbox Ruby packages.

vivab0rg 13y ago
This. I'm so grateful to Brightbox for having relieved me from the rvm/rbenv madness. Same painless packages on both development and production. Priceless.

werdnapk 13y ago

I find chruby (https://github.com/postmodern/chruby https://github.com/postmodern/chruby) to be a much nicer alternative to rbenv nowadays.

hiphopyo 13y ago
I can definitely vouch for that.

comice 13y ago

Bad firewalling advice imo. Use ubuntu's ufw. Admittedl, ufw feels more difficult if you already know iptables, but it's way more robust than the example given there.

phazmatis 13y ago
Would it have made this guide longer? If so, you're adding unnecessary complexity for what it essentially a beginner guide (says so in the title).
- comice 13y ago
  It would have made it shorter, and much simpler. Only iptables nerds will find ufw harder.

hiphopyo 13y ago

Choose OpenBSD for your Unix needs. OpenBSD -- the world's simplest and most secure Unix-like OS. The world's most used SSH implementation OpenSSH, the world's most elegant firewall PF, the world's most elegant mail server OpenSMTPD. OpenBSD -- the cleanest kernel, the cleanest userland and the cleanest configuration syntax. Also, http://puma.io/ http://puma.io/.

oblio 13y ago
This sounds like a bad spam post.
- hiphopyo 13y ago
  With Linux, it's lot of beating around the bush. Overcomplicated config files, a lot of disabling and removing of things one don't need, having to deal with a messy and outdated firewall. With OpenBSD, I'd just have to change a few config file lines and lo and behold have one of the most secure and well-thought out servers the world has ever seen. Also, with the existence of Puma, I don't see why anybody would want to use Passenger.
  - FooBarWidget 13y ago
    At least with Linux I don't have to wait 6 hours for all my software to finish compiling. Think about all the trees that are unnecessarily cut down because of all that compiling. And support for Linux is much easier to get than support for OpenBSD. Also, this is why anybody would want to use Passenger over Puma: https://github.com/phusion/passenger/wiki/Puma-vs-Phusion-Passenger https://github.com/phusion/passenger/wiki/Puma-vs-Phusion-Pa... (or vice versa, for that matter) TLDR: Passenger takes a more holistic and integrated approach and is a lot easier to use. It has superior management and administration tools, superior robustness features, superior security features (e.g. sandboxing through user switching), better documentation, uses less memory, etc.
    - hiphopyo 13y ago
      OpenBSD doesn't require compiling, it has precompiled packages just like Linux. Yes, support for Linux is much more wide-spread, but that's due to marketing and not the quality of the OSes themselves. As for Passenger vs Puma, no management and administration tool is more superior than the Unix commandline. Plus, you don't need fancy sandboxing features assuming your OS user account is properly secured in the first place. You mention superior this and that, but I find it all hard to swallow as I know you guys go around spamming Puma-related articles and tutorials with stuff about Passenger.

sandGorgon 13y ago

So I see a lot of guides like this (I have one myself), but none that are built on top of Chef-solo/Ansible/Knife. Which makes me wonder, which is the correct way which lends itself to automation and doesn't depend on AWS/AMI?

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

pkallberg 13y ago

That's a great guide! We realized that a lot of people were spending a lot of time on stuff like this, and that's why we built Cloud 66. We help you to deploy and manage your applications on any cloud (ie. DigitalOcean, AWS, Rackspace etc) - feel free to check us out http://cloud66.com http://cloud66.com Disclaimer: I work for Cloud 66