spork error: Gem::LoadError

rubyonrails-talk
2

In your Gemfile you can specify: gem 'spork', :version => 0.8.4

Also you might wanna delete newer spork: gem uninstall sport -v=0.9.0

It's more important: you will have the same problem if you do no use Gemsets with RVM. After every update your gems will be confused. I hope you used RVM for Ruby install.

Ask me in private if you have further struggles. good luck, Zoltan

3

===

$ spork

Using RSpec

Preloading Rails environment

You have already activated spork 0.9.0.rc8, but your Gemfile requires

spork 0.8.4. Consider using bundle exec. (Gem::LoadError)

===

After updating my Gemfile to newer versions of several gems, I got a

message that said none of my tests could be run??? So, I changed the

versions back to the old versions, but now I get that spork error. Is

there a way to ‘unactivate’ spork 0.9.0 and ‘activate’ spork 0.8.4?

Hi, if you’re installing gems using bundler, the recommended way to run

their associated executables is by doing the following:

bundle exec

Thus, in your case, you’ll run spark as

bundle exec spork

Good luck,

-Conrad

4

Zoltan Gero wrote in post #1011290:

In your Gemfile you can specify: gem 'spork', :version => 0.8.4

I was alreading doing that, albeit using rails3 syntax

gem 'spork', '0.8.4'

Also you might wanna delete newer spork: gem uninstall sport -v=0.9.0

Thanks. I didn't try that. I figured 'bundle install' was responsible for that.

It's more important: you will have the same problem if you do no use Gemsets with RVM. After every update your gems will be confused. I hope you used RVM for Ruby install.

I am using rvm and gemsets, e.g. 1.9.2@rails3tutorial.

Ask me in private if you have further struggles. good luck,

I ended up deleting the rails3gemset and starting over with a new Gemfile.

5

Conrad Taylor wrote in post #1011293:

6

FYI, if you type "bundle install --binstubs", Bundler will put wrapper commands in a bin directory at the root of your project. The name/location is customizable, but ./bin is the default. So now you can type "bin/<executable-name>", assuming the gem that installs the executable is in your Gemfile.

Now, if you put ./bin at the front of your path (e.g. export PATH=./bin:$PATH), you can just type <executable-name> and it's the same as if you typed "bundle exec <executable-name>".

Cheers, David

7

Yep, bundle exec is useful but for longer time it won't solve your problems at all. Avoiding gem dependency problems with bundle exec is like plaster against cancer. RVM and Gemsets are the only way to avoid conflicts in future.

If you follow that tutorial: in later chapters there will be other new gems too. When you install them like first writing it to Gemfile then bundle install pay attention to specify the gemname properly: "bundle install <gemname>" (for example: "bundle install autotest"). This way bundle will only install that gem and it won't touch the others.

Also it might be useful to export your Gemset. It's a really good practise for all your projects in future.

Ask me in private if you have further problems, good luck: gezope