[chef] Re: chef_gem vs. gem_package

["Scott M. Likens" < >]

Sam,

Sounds like http://docs.opscode.com/resource.html is a bit off. Perhaps 
my history is off, but if I recall chef_gem was created as a helper to 
install the gem during the compilation phase and reload the gem path so 
you can load said gem in your cookbook.

Reviewing 
https://github.com/opscode/chef/blob/11.6.0/lib/chef/resource/chef_gem.rb#L43-49 
does appear to make this assumption true.  chef_gem is using the same 
resource to install gems, it just has the after command to reload the 
gem path.

https://github.com/opscode/chef/blob/11.6.0/lib/chef/resource/gem_package.rb

So you use gem_package if you want the gem installed during the regular 
cookbook run; if you need to use the gem in your cookbooks you should 
use chef_gem.

Yeah it sounds like there's a documentation ticket in the brew for this 
resource, at least my knowledge conflicts with the documentation.

Scott


On 8/5/13 5:31 AM, Sam Darwin wrote:
> from the documentation:
>
> Warning
> The chef_gem and gem_package resources are both used to install Ruby gems. For
> any machine on which Chef is installed, there are two instances of Ruby. One 
> is
> the standard, system-wide instance of Ruby and the other is a dedicated
> instance that is available only to Chef. Use the chef_gem resource to install
> gems into the instance of Ruby that is dedicated to Chef. Use the gem_package
> resource to install all other gems (i.e. install gems system-wide).
>
> from observation:
>
> gem_package will fall-back to chef_gem behavior if ruby isn't on the system.
> have you seen this?  Am I imagining it?     The problem is that you don't get
> consistent results from a recipe.   If one machine has a system ruby 1.8,
> another machine has chef-client (with ruby 1.9) and no system ruby, very
> different things can happen with the same recipe.     Should the meaning of
> chef_gem vs. gem_package , and the differences between them,  be more 
> enforced?
>
> !DSPAM:51ff9b3b321631804284693!