[ANN] One-Click Ruby Installer 182-15 for Windows
Curt Hibbs
for an updated version of Ruby 1.8.2 stable *and*
the new 1.8.3 preview1, but there appears to be some
delay for Matz in releasing 1.8.3 preview1. So I am
releasing the updated stable version now.
This release of the One-Click Ruby Installer for
Windows is built from Ruby 1.8.2 final. It mostly
upgrades included extensions and applications to
their most recent versions.
There is one notable addition: fxri 0.3.2.
Be sure to try it (if you use FreeRIDE, fxri
is also embedded into FreeRIDE) because it is
wonderfully addictive! fxri combines a nice
interactive search interface to the Ruby docu-
mentation along with an interactive ruby
session (irb) -- all wrapped up in a nice GUI
shell.
Changes Since 1.8.2-14 Final:
- Added fxri 0.3.2
- Updated FXRuby 1.2.6
- Updated FreeRIDE to 0.9.4
- Updated RubyGems to 0.8.10
- Created start menu shortcuts for RubyGems gem_server
and viewing the RDoc for installed gems.
- Included new build of readline 4.3.2
(I hope this fixes readline problems)
- Included user-submitted irb patch
- Included ruby/misc/ruby-electric.el from Ruby 1.9
- Included TestUnit patch needed by Rails
Enjoy!
Curt
Lyndon Samson
>
I noticed SQLite was included as a RFE, any word on whether thats
considered valuable? The byte overhead wouldn't be much and its handy
to have some sort of persistence above and beyond marshalled arrays of
hashs :-)
--
Into RFID? www.rfidnewsupdate.com Simple, fast, news.
Matt Mower
On 4/26/05, Curt Hibbs <cu...@hibbs.com> wrote:
> This release of the One-Click Ruby Installer for
> Windows is built from Ruby 1.8.2 final. It mostly
> upgrades included extensions and applications to
> their most recent versions.
>
Just thought i'd let you know that installing this package doesn't
seem to have added C:\RUBY\BIN to the path or setup the PATHEXT entry
for executing .rb and .rbw files. If I remember correctly the
1.8.2-14 package did do this.
I installed by first uninstalling the 1.8.2-14 package (which deleted
my C:\RUBY directory) and then running the new installer. I'm using
Windows XP-SP1.
Regards,
Matt
--
Matt Mower :: http://matt.blogs.it/
Alexandru Popescu
Hash: SHA1
[quote Matt Mower::on 4/26/2005 4:16 PM]
This is weird. Same env, same steps still i see the entry in Path definition on the System variables.
- --:alex |.::the_mindstorm::.|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFCbmO+OCPjdDT2FEURAnLEAKDH/MjTusGtVcc/diatBtNMMNeX4QCgirHg
rZ7X/OgHDuwuSL371v7rYh8=
=VboH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Curt Hibbs
>>
>>Just thought i'd let you know that installing this package doesn't
>>seem to have added C:\RUBY\BIN to the path or setup the PATHEXT entry
>>for executing .rb and .rbw files. If I remember correctly the
>>1.8.2-14 package did do this.
>>
>>I installed by first uninstalling the 1.8.2-14 package (which deleted
>>my C:\RUBY directory) and then running the new installer. I'm using
>>Windows XP-SP1.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Matt
>>
>
> This is weird. Same env, same steps still i see the entry in Path definition on the System variables.
This one is gong to drive me crazy! This happened to a handful of people
with 1.8.2-14, but the vast majority had no problem.
Does it help if you reboot after installation?
Curt
Curt Hibbs
> On 4/26/05, Curt Hibbs <cu...@hibbs.com> wrote:
>
>
> I noticed SQLite was included as a RFE, any word on whether thats
> considered valuable? The byte overhead wouldn't be much and its handy
> to have some sort of persistence above and beyond marshalled arrays of
> hashs :-)
>
My longterm goal is to replace actually including more extensions with a
nice integrated GUI interface for browsing and installing RubyGems
packaged extensions. SQLite would probably fit into that category.
Curt
Matt Mower
On 4/26/05, Curt Hibbs <cu...@hibbs.com> wrote:
> > This is weird. Same env, same steps still i see the entry in Path definition on the System variables.
>
> This one is gong to drive me crazy! This happened to a handful of people
> with 1.8.2-14, but the vast majority had no problem.
>
Yes, more puzzling still since I'm one of the ones for whom it worked
with 1.8.2-14.
> Does it help if you reboot after installation?
>
No, sadly I had tried that before posting.
Jon A. Lambert
> This release of the One-Click Ruby Installer for
> Windows is built from Ruby 1.8.2 final. It mostly
> upgrades included extensions and applications to
> their most recent versions.
Which compiler is used to produce this version?
VC 6, 7, 7.1?
Thanks
--
J Lambert
Linus Sellberg
> (I hope this fixes readline problems)
Yay! Thanks a lot :D
It no longer crashes when I start irb and press tab twice.
It apparently didn't fix the locale problem though. It is still
impossible[*] to type []}{ etc and typing äöå exits irb. No error
message or anything, just a prompt.
[*] Outside emacs-shell that is. Yes, I know that it possible to fix
with a .irbrc, however, it isn't something that a user should ever
have to care about.
Karl von Laudermann
launch it. I clicked Next to continue, then I clicked "I Agree" at the
Licence Agreement screen. Then I clicked Next at the Choose Components
screen, and Install at the Choose Install Location screen. Finally,
after it finished installing, I clicked Finish to exit the installer.
So my question is, which of these seven clicks is the actual "one
click"? :-P
Lothar Scholz
KvL> Ok, I downloaded the installer .exe file. I double-clicked the file to
KvL> launch it. I clicked Next to continue, then I clicked "I Agree" at the
KvL> Licence Agreement screen. Then I clicked Next at the Choose Components
KvL> screen, and Install at the Choose Install Location screen. Finally,
KvL> after it finished installing, I clicked Finish to exit the installer.
KvL> So my question is, which of these seven clicks is the actual "one
KvL> click"? :-P
You only need one click to do the installation - after you finished
the setup correctly. It's the same on unix. Install with a single
keystroke (after you typed "./configure ; make ; sudo make install" on
the same command line) :-P
Just choose your words with wisdom (and a lawyer in the background).
--
Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions dot com
Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
Curt Hibbs
Yep, I've had the same thought myself... I just decided not to point it
out! :-)
Curt Hibbs
VC++ 7.1
nobu....@softhome.net
At Wed, 27 Apr 2005 06:26:51 +0900,
Curt Hibbs wrote in [ruby-talk:139947]:
> > Which compiler is used to produce this version?
> > VC 6, 7, 7.1?
>
> VC++ 7.1
Have you confirmed that all extensions are built by VC++ 7.1,
or linked to msvcr71.dll?
--
Nobu Nakada
Curt Hibbs
All releases of the one-click installer in 2004 and 2005 have been built
with vc++ 7.1, and most included extensions are built from source.
The few that are now included from binaries (like FXRuby) have have not
been checked. Should they be?
Curt
Jon A. Lambert
>>> VC++ 7.1
>>
>>
>> Have you confirmed that all extensions are built by VC++ 7.1,
>> or linked to msvcr71.dll?
>
> All releases of the one-click installer in 2004 and 2005 have been
> built with vc++ 7.1, and most included extensions are built from
> source.
> The few that are now included from binaries (like FXRuby) have have
> not been checked. Should they be?
>
I do see the VC 6.0 RTL and STL are in the distro (msvcrt.dll and
msvcp60.dll) so that should be okay if there are VC 6.0 extensions.
I was wondering as I use the Borland compiler for my ruby extensions and
since many windows users are probably using your installation, I should
probably distribute Borland RTL with my extensions or try to make final with
VC7.1.
--
J. Lambert
nobu....@softhome.net
At Wed, 27 Apr 2005 12:32:55 +0900,
Curt Hibbs wrote in [ruby-talk:139990]:
> > Have you confirmed that all extensions are built by VC++ 7.1,
> > or linked to msvcr71.dll?
>
> All releases of the one-click installer in 2004 and 2005 have been built
> with vc++ 7.1, and most included extensions are built from source.
>
> The few that are now included from binaries (like FXRuby) have have not
> been checked. Should they be?
Yes, definitely. Mixing usage of runtime DLL causes unexpected
results. And recent versions change the ruby DLL name and the
site-wide library directory according to the runtime to get rid
of such hazard.
--
Nobu Nakada
Curt Hibbs
Hmmm.... looks like I need to start building *all* extensions from
source to ensure this.
Thanks,
Curt
Lothar Scholz
CH> nobu....@softhome.net wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> At Wed, 27 Apr 2005 12:32:55 +0900,
>> Curt Hibbs wrote in [ruby-talk:139990]:
>>
>>>>Have you confirmed that all extensions are built by VC++ 7.1,
>>>>or linked to msvcr71.dll?
>>>
>>>All releases of the one-click installer in 2004 and 2005 have been built
>>>with vc++ 7.1, and most included extensions are built from source.
>>>
>>>The few that are now included from binaries (like FXRuby) have have not
>>>been checked. Should they be?
>>
>>
>> Yes, definitely. Mixing usage of runtime DLL causes unexpected
>> results. And recent versions change the ruby DLL name and the
>> site-wide library directory according to the runtime to get rid
>> of such hazard.
CH> Hmmm.... looks like I need to start building *all* extensions from
CH> source to ensure this.
Use a tool like the "depends.exe" from older MSVC versions and look
what DLL's are required. You don't need to rebuild all extensions.
nobu....@softhome.net
At Thu, 28 Apr 2005 01:39:26 +0900,
Lothar Scholz wrote in [ruby-talk:140089]:
> CH> Hmmm.... looks like I need to start building *all* extensions from
> CH> source to ensure this.
>
> Use a tool like the "depends.exe" from older MSVC versions and look
> what DLL's are required. You don't need to rebuild all extensions.
$ ruby -e 'Dir["**/*.{dll,so}"].each {|so|
IO.popen("dumpbin -imports #{so}"){|f|
f.grep(/^\s*(ms\w+\.dll)\s*$/i){
dll=$1;puts "#{so}: #{dll}" if /msvcr71/i !~ dll
}
}
}'
bin/libeay32.dll: MSVCRT.dll
bin/libssl32.dll: MSVCRT.dll
bin/msvcp60.dll: MSVCRT.dll
bin/ssleay32.dll: MSVCRT.dll
bin/tcl83.dll: MSVCRT.dll
bin/tclpip83.dll: MSVCRT.dll
bin/tk83.dll: MSVCRT.dll
bin/zlib1.dll: MSVCRT.dll
lib/tcl8.3/dde1.1/tcldde83.dll: MSVCRT.dll
lib/tcl8.3/reg1.0/tclreg83.dll: MSVCRT.dll
freeride/redist/i386-mswin32/ripper.so: MSVCRT.dll
lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/fxruby-1.2.6-mswin32/ext/fox12/fox12.so: MSVCRT.dll
lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/fxruby-1.2.6-mswin32/ext/fox12/fox12.so: MSVCP60.dll
lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/i386-msvcrt/glut.so: MSVCRT.dll
lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/i386-msvcrt/opengl.so: MSVCRT.dll
And, why zlib.so is under site_ruby?
--
Nobu Nakada
Curt Hibbs
Good question... I'll find out. Thanks for the list.
Curt
Curt Hibbs
Endy Tjahjono
>Changes Since 1.8.2-14 Final:
>- Added fxri 0.3.2
I tried to hide the DOS box by appending '.rbw' to 'fxri' in the 'bin'
directory, but when I ran 'fxri.rbw', it crashed with message
'...requested to terminate in unusual way...' How can I hide the DOS
box when I run fxri?
>- Created start menu shortcuts for RubyGems gem_server
> and viewing the RDoc for installed gems.
The entire ruby shortcuts are created on the installing user start
menu (I installed as Administrator), instead of all users start menu.
And the rights to read, write, etc is set only to the installing user
too. Is this intentional?
--
Endy
Kent Sibilev
somehow broken. The same thing happens when you run
rubyw.exe ri
from the bin directory.
Kent.
Curt Hibbs
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 20:12:43 +0900, Curt Hibbs <cu...@hibbs.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Changes Since 1.8.2-14 Final:
>>- Added fxri 0.3.2
>
>
> I tried to hide the DOS box by appending '.rbw' to 'fxri' in the 'bin'
> directory, but when I ran 'fxri.rbw', it crashed with message
> '...requested to terminate in unusual way...' How can I hide the DOS
> box when I run fxri?
There is currently a known problem in the one-click installer running
rubyw.exe (which *.rbw files do) with some FXRuby programs (including
fxri and FreeRIDE). Until I figure it out the DOS boxes will have to stay.
>>- Created start menu shortcuts for RubyGems gem_server
>> and viewing the RDoc for installed gems.
>
>
> The entire ruby shortcuts are created on the installing user start
> menu (I installed as Administrator), instead of all users start menu.
> And the rights to read, write, etc is set only to the installing user
> too. Is this intentional?
Yes, it is.
Curt
Curt Hibbs
> I see the same thing on my windows box. It seems that rubyw.exe is
> somehow broken. The same thing happens when you run
>
> rubyw.exe ri
>
> from the bin directory.
I wouldn't expect ri under rubyw.exe, its a console app that expects to
write to stdout.
Curt
Kent Sibilev
fails either way:
rubyw fxri
I've just downloaded one of the mswin32 builds from ruby-lang.org and
it works correctly.
Kent.
Curt Hibbs
> It seems it doesn't matter whether it's a console or a window app, it
> fails either way:
>
> rubyw fxri
>
> I've just downloaded one of the mswin32 builds from ruby-lang.org and
> it works correctly.
Ok, that a very good indication that the problem is in the build of
rubyw.exe (I was thinking it was some weird interaction between my build
of rubyw and FXRuby). This should help narrow things down.
Thanks,
Curt
Stephan Kämper
> Endy Tjahjono wrote:
>>> - Created start menu shortcuts for RubyGems gem_server
>>> and viewing the RDoc for installed gems.
>>
>> The entire ruby shortcuts are created on the installing user start
>> menu (I installed as Administrator), instead of all users start menu.
>> And the rights to read, write, etc is set only to the installing user
>> too. Is this intentional?
>
> Yes, it is.
>
> Curt
I'd be interested in the reason(s) for this.
I'm currently running a programming course at the local community
college. Of course the students are not allowed to run whatever they
wrote as admins.
Now, not having the start menu available it a bit inconvenient for them.
Would it be possible/acceptable to optionally add the Ruby stuff to all
users start menu?
Happy rubying
Stephan
nobu....@softhome.net
At Sat, 30 Apr 2005 15:18:31 +0900,
Curt Hibbs wrote in [ruby-talk:140572]:
Maybe, msvcrt.dll mismatch between ruby and fox?
--
Nobu Nakada
Curt Hibbs
I think its probably reasonable to create the start menu items for "all
users". I'll add that to the todo list.
Curt
Curt Hibbs
Since your original post on this subject, I've been thinking of this
possibility. I'll check it out.
Curt