[ANN] One-Click Ruby Installer for Windows 1.8.5-21 released
Curt Hibbs
released version 1.8.5. A few Win32-Utils packages
have also been upgraded to newly released
versions, but other than that, everything else is
the same as the 1.8.4 release. You can download it
here:
http://rubyforge.org/frs/?group_id=167
If you use the Breakpointer package with Ruby on
Rails, then you should stay with 1.8.4 because
1.8.5 contains a change that breaks this package.
Change Log
==========
2006-08 release 21 - stable release
* Upgraded Ruby to ruby-1.8.5
* Upgraded to win32-clipboard 0.4.1
* Upgraded to win32-eventlog 0.4.2
* Upgraded to win32-process 0.5.1
Jon Egil Strand
> This release upgrades Ruby to the recently
> released version 1.8.5.
Just wanted to say that your work is highly appreciated. A stable and
updated windows-platform is paramount for my work in spreading Ruby.
Thanks!
--
Jon Egil Strand
Phone: +47 98232340
j...@luretanker.no
Bill Kelly
>
> This release upgrades Ruby to the recently
> released version 1.8.5. A few Win32-Utils packages
> have also been upgraded to newly released
> versions, but other than that, everything else is
> the same as the 1.8.4 release. You can download it
> here:
>
> http://rubyforge.org/frs/?group_id=167
Curt,
Thanks very much for this release and all your work on
the win32 installer!
By any chance, are the .lib files for the packaged dll's
available anywhere?
For example, when building a ruby extension (eventmachine),
during the extconf, I get:
checking for main() in ssleay32.lib... no
It would be great to have the .lib files corresponding to
the .dll's.
What do you think?
Thanks,
Bill
Curt Hibbs
binaries. In the case of OpenSSL, these binaries do include the lib
files and I should have been including them. You can extract them
yourself from here:
http://jarp.does.notwork.org/win32/openssl-0.9.7b-1-mswin32.zip
Curt
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
I get paid to sit in front of. :) So now I can experience first had the
thrills, chills and spills of Microsoft Development without parting with
any cash. I think I have MinGW and MSys too; something I installed
required them. And of course I also have CygWin and Plan C, aka VMware
Server. :)
So I think I'll download One Click and see if I can build extensions,
etc. Are there some *known* not to work with VC++ Express?
Peña, Botp
# http://rubyforge.org/frs/?group_id=167
does this include the patch for the recently discovered hash mem leak?
thanks for one-click.
kind regards -botp
Bill Kelly
>
> A lot of the components of the installer are acquired as prebuilt
> binaries. In the case of OpenSSL, these binaries do include the lib
> files and I should have been including them. You can extract them
> yourself from here:
>
> http://jarp.does.notwork.org/win32/openssl-0.9.7b-1-mswin32.zip
Awesome,
checking for main() in ssleay32.lib... yes
checking for main() in libeay32.lib... yes
Thanks!
Bill
Austin Ziegler
> So I think I'll download One Click and see if I can build extensions,
> etc. Are there some *known* not to work with VC++ Express?
Most would be bad. I'm finally getting to the point where I can write
up an email that is overdue regarding this.
I think what I'm really going to hope for is some way to *wrap* cl.exe
calls to look like gcc compiles. The real trick will be to make it so
that ./configure does something useful in an MSYS environment.
-austin
--
Austin Ziegler * halos...@gmail.com * http://www.halostatue.ca/
* aus...@halostatue.ca * http://www.halostatue.ca/feed/
* aus...@zieglers.ca
Curt Hibbs
> I get paid to sit in front of. :) So now I can experience first had the
> thrills, chills and spills of Microsoft Development without parting with
> any cash. I think I have MinGW and MSys too; something I installed
> required them. And of course I also have CygWin and Plan C, aka VMware
> Server. :)
>
> So I think I'll download One Click and see if I can build extensions,
> etc. Are there some *known* not to work with VC++ Express?
The compiler situation on windows is currently an incompatible mess.
We're persuing possible solutions (Austin Ziegler is spearheading part
of this with Microsoft). But currently the only gauranteed safe way to
compile extensions is to use VC++ 6.
Curt
Berger, Daniel
What about doing something along the lines of Strawberry Perl, i.e.
bundle a compiler with the distro?
http://win32.perl.org/wiki/index.php?title=Strawberry_Perl
Regards,
Dan
PS - Maybe now would be a good time to finish up that Win32API article
I've been working on. :)
This communication is the property of Qwest and may contain confidential or
privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication
in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy
all copies of the communication and any attachments.
no...@ruby-lang.org
At Wed, 30 Aug 2006 00:32:36 +0900,
Curt Hibbs wrote in [ruby-talk:211324]:
> This release upgrades Ruby to the recently
> released version 1.8.5. A few Win32-Utils packages
> have also been upgraded to newly released
> versions, but other than that, everything else is
> the same as the 1.8.4 release. You can download it
> here:
>
> http://rubyforge.org/frs/?group_id=167
Did you decide not to use [ruby-core:07922]?
--
Nobu Nakada
Alexandru Popescu
Do you think you are allowed to distribute MS compiler (and the other
tools needed)? (cause I don't think so).
/alex
--
w( the_mindstorm )p.
Curt Hibbs
> bundle a compiler with the distro?
>
> http://win32.perl.org/wiki/index.php?title=Strawberry_Perl
>
> Regards,
>
> Dan
That's a very interesting idea. It would really provide a standard
environment for building ruby extensions.
Curt
Curt Hibbs
I'm definitely going to use it. I have it saved in a bug report:
http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=4962&group_id=167&atid=715
This release was just a real quick update (no bug fixes or added features).
Curt
John Lam
remotely possible. VC 6 is a really old product, but I could imagine
the approvals that would be necessary to make something like this
happen.
I wouldn't hold my breath, but you never know ... :)
Alexandru Popescu
> I just sent out a mail to some friends at MSFT to see if this is even
> remotely possible. VC 6 is a really old product, but I could imagine
> the approvals that would be necessary to make something like this
> happen.
>
> I wouldn't hold my breath, but you never know ... :)
>
Hmmm... you are an optimistic person :-]. Is there a list of the
needed utilities that should be distributed? (I mean cl.exe, nmake,
etc).
/alex
--
:Architect of InfoQ.com:
.w( the_mindstorm )p.
John Lam
This is something that various folks at MSFT have fought for over the
years - getting a compiler into the core Windows distribution. That's
*finally* going to happen with Vista since .NET FX 3.0 ships as an
install-by-default optional component (check box is on by default but
no dependencies on .NET FX 3.0 by the core OS). C# and VB.NET will be
there, but I don't know if VC++ will be there.
On 8/30/06, Alexandru Popescu <the.mindstor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/30/06, John Lam <drj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I just sent out a mail to some friends at MSFT to see if this is even
> > remotely possible. VC 6 is a really old product, but I could imagine
> > the approvals that would be necessary to make something like this
> > happen.
> >
> > I wouldn't hold my breath, but you never know ... :)
> >
>
> Hmmm... you are an optimistic person :-]. Is there a list of the
> needed utilities that should be distributed? (I mean cl.exe, nmake,
> etc).
>
> ./alex
Curt Hibbs
> >
> > What about doing something along the lines of Strawberry Perl, i.e.
> > bundle a compiler with the distro?
> >
> > http://win32.perl.org/wiki/index.php?title=Strawberry_Perl
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Dan
> >
>
> Do you think you are allowed to distribute MS compiler (and the other
> tools needed)? (cause I don't think so).
No, you can't redistribute MS tools. This would only be a possibility
is we go the MinGW route.
Curt
Curt Hibbs
Curt
On 8/30/06, John Lam <drj...@gmail.com> wrote:
Alexandru Popescu
I remember I've started a long discussion about this in the past, but
I don't know the conclusion of MinGW vs VC. Would it be possible and
how complex would be to currently move the One-Click installer from VC
to MinGW?
Austin Ziegler
Do you want to have a 64-bit Ruby on Windows eventually?
If the answer is yes, MinGW is completely stalled on this matter. The
only answer there is VC8.
Berger, Daniel
> From: Curt Hibbs [mailto:ml.c...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 2:49 PM
> To: ruby-talk ML
> Subject: Re: [ANN] One-Click Ruby Installer for Windows
> 1.8.5-21 released
>
>
> > >
> > > What about doing something along the lines of Strawberry
> Perl, i.e.
> > > bundle a compiler with the distro?
> > >
> > > http://win32.perl.org/wiki/index.php?title=Strawberry_Perl
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Dan
> > >
> >
> > Do you think you are allowed to distribute MS compiler (and
> the other
> > tools needed)? (cause I don't think so).
>
> No, you can't redistribute MS tools. This would only be a
> possibility is we go the MinGW route.
>
> Curt
You can if you get permission. MS is becoming a little more accepting
of OOS, right? Or at least, trying to? Maybe they'd be willing to make
a gesture. Mind you, it might be the sort of gesture that involves a
middle finger, but it doesn't hurt to ask.
- Dan
Alexandru Popescu
> On 8/30/06, Alexandru Popescu <the.mindstor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I remember I've started a long discussion about this in the past, but
> > I don't know the conclusion of MinGW vs VC. Would it be possible and
> > how complex would be to currently move the One-Click installer from VC
> > to MinGW?
>
> Do you want to have a 64-bit Ruby on Windows eventually?
>
I don't have such machine so for the moment my answer would be no. But
considering the spread of Ruby, this version would be quite normal to
exist at some point.
> If the answer is yes, MinGW is completely stalled on this matter. The
> only answer there is VC8.
>
Austin do you know if MinGW is at least planning to support this or is
it a dead-end?
/alex
--
w( the_mindstorm )p.
> -austin
Austin Ziegler
> Austin do you know if MinGW is at least planning to support this or is
> it a dead-end?
Not a clue. I don't actually use MinGW; I considered the whole project
a dead-end some time ago when they couldn't get their act together on
how best to install. They may have improved since then, but I know
specifically that they are having problems with x86-64 support (and
finding people to work with it).
There are going to be other good reasons to switch to a later version
of the MS compiler which *is* free (as in beer).
mortench
> Do you want to have a 64-bit Ruby on Windows eventually?
> If the answer is yes, MinGW is completely stalled on this matter. The
> only answer there is VC8.
The world is clearly moving rapidly towards 64 bit architectures. AMD
x86 chips has been 64 bits for years now, and even Intel got their acts
together with Core Duo 2 recently. Also the upcomming Microsoft Vista
will only have complete functionality on 64 bit and various other
software like Exchange will NOT work at all on 32bit machines.
Ruby should go for 64bit as well as soon as possible. I would prefer
Ruby on Windows to be compiled with VC8 for interoperability with .NET
and other Windows C++ libraries (sort of the whole point of a Windows
version) -, but if MinGW does not support 64 bit than I can't see any
other choice than VC8 anyway.
/ Morten
Alexandru Popescu
I agree with this, but I wonder if there is somebody that has
succesfully compiler Ruby with VC8. I rember somebody has started this
process (Austin is it you?), but never heard of the final result.
Austin Ziegler
> succesfully compiler Ruby with VC8. I rember somebody has started this
> process (Austin is it you?), but never heard of the final result.
I had actually started and I did get a running Ruby. But I had to do a
*lot* of extra stuff toward getting a working One-Click Installer
approach.
I have recently had time to install the appropriate development tools
on my laptop (my old Windows laptop, not a virtual environment in my
Mac, which I will be doing later), so I hope to pick this up again to
help with the effort we were talking with Microsoft about.
no...@ruby-lang.org
At Thu, 31 Aug 2006 06:22:13 +0900,
Austin Ziegler wrote in [ruby-talk:211614]:
> Do you want to have a 64-bit Ruby on Windows eventually?
>
> If the answer is yes, MinGW is completely stalled on this matter. The
> only answer there is VC8.
64-bit ruby is binary incompatible with 32-bit ruby.
So it isn't concerned with 32-bit One-Click Installer.
--
Nobu Nakada
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
it's the compiler of choice for 64-bit systems.Gentoo 2006.1 just came
out today and they're on 4.1.1 now. I'm in the process of migrating to
4.1.1 even as we speak on my Gentoo boxes.
Alexandru Popescu
I think there are/there have been attempts to do this (cygwin,
unixtools) but I wouldn't walk this way.
Alexandru Popescu
> > I agree with this, but I wonder if there is somebody that has
> > succesfully compiler Ruby with VC8. I rember somebody has started this
> > process (Austin is it you?), but never heard of the final result.
>
> I had actually started and I did get a running Ruby. But I had to do a
> *lot* of extra stuff toward getting a working One-Click Installer
> approach.
>
That's good to know, at least the result was not negative.
> I have recently had time to install the appropriate development tools
> on my laptop (my old Windows laptop, not a virtual environment in my
> Mac, which I will be doing later), so I hope to pick this up again to
> help with the effort we were talking with Microsoft about.
>
Please do so :-], till MS guys will not change their minds.
I am a little puzzled by Nobu's comment:
[quote]
64-bit ruby is binary incompatible with 32-bit ruby.
So it isn't concerned with 32-bit One-Click Installer.
[/quote]
What does this mean?
/alex
--
w( the_mindstorm )p.
> -austin
Austin Ziegler
> Can gcc 4.1.1 and supporting goodies run on Windows? From what I hear,
> it's the compiler of choice for 64-bit systems.Gentoo 2006.1 just came
> out today and they're on 4.1.1 now. I'm in the process of migrating to
> 4.1.1 even as we speak on my Gentoo boxes.
Sure they will. But the tools have to be ported to the mingw
environment, which is *not* entirely Unix-like.
Austin Ziegler
> I am a little puzzled by Nobu's comment:
>
> [quote]
> 64-bit ruby is binary incompatible with 32-bit ruby.
> So it isn't concerned with 32-bit One-Click Installer.
> [/quote]
>
> What does this mean?
It means that in theory, we could switch to MinGW and worry about a
64-bit OCI later. However, I think that we're going to need a 64-bit
OCI at some point sooner rather than later (although I will *not* be
able to help with that in any way). The real downside to the 64-bit
OCI, though, is that we *will* have to compile all of the supporting
libraries ourselves because no one else is yet offering 64-bit Windows
versions of their code (e.g., OpenSSL, pdcurses, etc.) for download.
Curt Hibbs
> > On 8/30/06, Alexandru Popescu <the.mindstor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I agree with this, but I wonder if there is somebody that has
> > > succesfully compiler Ruby with VC8. I rember somebody has started this
> > > process (Austin is it you?), but never heard of the final result.
> >
> > I had actually started and I did get a running Ruby. But I had to do a
> > *lot* of extra stuff toward getting a working One-Click Installer
> > approach.
> >
>
> That's good to know, at least the result was not negative.
>
> > I have recently had time to install the appropriate development tools
> > on my laptop (my old Windows laptop, not a virtual environment in my
> > Mac, which I will be doing later), so I hope to pick this up again to
> > help with the effort we were talking with Microsoft about.
> >
>
> Please do so :-], till MS guys will not change their minds.
>
> I am a little puzzled by Nobu's comment:
>
> [quote]
> 64-bit ruby is binary incompatible with 32-bit ruby.
> So it isn't concerned with 32-bit One-Click Installer.
> [/quote]
>
> What does this mean?
>
I think he means that since 64-bit Ruby and 32-bit Ruby are completely
incompatible with each other, that it would not be necessary to choose
the same solution both. Meaning that it would be ok, for example, to
choose MinGW for 32-bit Ruby and VC++ for 64-bit Ruby.
I could be wrong, but that was how I read it.
Curt
Alexandru Popescu
Hmmm... I really don't think this would be a good decission. I see
that there will be more effort needed for supporting 64-bit Ruby, but
to completely double it doesn't seem to be the best option.
just my 2 eurocents,
/alex
--
w( the_mindstorm )p.
> I could be wrong, but that was how I read it.
>
> Curt
>
>
Brian Hicks
> I agree with this, but I wonder if there is somebody that has
> succesfully compiler Ruby with VC8. I rember somebody has started this
> process (Austin is it you?), but never heard of the final result.
>
> ./alex
I did it the other day just to see if I could. I downloaded the source
from www.ruby-lang.org and followed the readme in the win32 directory
and had zero problems. I haven't tested the result much, though...
Oh yeah, this was 32-bit, also. In case anyone cares...
Brian
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Austin Ziegler
> I did it the other day just to see if I could. I downloaded the source
> from www.ruby-lang.org and followed the readme in the win32 directory
> and had zero problems. I haven't tested the result much, though...
>
> Oh yeah, this was 32-bit, also. In case anyone cares...
Right. Building Ruby itself is dead simple.
Now try to build the RMagick extension and get it to work. (Note: I
haven't tried it, personally. It *might* work.)
There are some tricks to getting it all to work, but at some point you
have to build your own version of a lot of libraries.
Timothy Hunter
> On 8/31/06, Brian Hicks <bwh...@aep.com> wrote:
>> I did it the other day just to see if I could. I downloaded the source
>> from www.ruby-lang.org and followed the readme in the win32 directory
>> and had zero problems. I haven't tested the result much, though...
>>
>> Oh yeah, this was 32-bit, also. In case anyone cares...
>
> Right. Building Ruby itself is dead simple.
>
> Now try to build the RMagick extension and get it to work. (Note: I
> haven't tried it, personally. It *might* work.)
>
> There are some tricks to getting it all to work, but at some point you
> have to build your own version of a lot of libraries.
>
> -austin
versions of RMagick for several years. With practice he got it down to a
2-day task. Brett DiFrischia did the latest version, 1.13.0. That one
took 6 weeks. One of the biggest problems (AFAIK) is RMagick's configure
script, which has easily over 100 feature tests and of course doesn't
work at all on Windows.
Bill Kelly
>
> Austin Ziegler wrote:
>>
>> Right. Building Ruby itself is dead simple.
>>
>> Now try to build the RMagick extension and get it to work. (Note: I
>> haven't tried it, personally. It *might* work.)
>>
>> There are some tricks to getting it all to work, but at some point you
>> have to build your own version of a lot of libraries.
>>
>> -austin
> Or you could just ask those who've done it. Kaspar Schiess did the Win32
> versions of RMagick for several years. With practice he got it down to a
> 2-day task. Brett DiFrischia did the latest version, 1.13.0. That one
> took 6 weeks. One of the biggest problems (AFAIK) is RMagick's configure
> script, which has easily over 100 feature tests and of course doesn't
> work at all on Windows.
What I did was to install the same version of ImageMagick
I wanted to use on Windows, on Linux. Then run RMagick's
/configure on Linux, then copy the resulting
rmagick_config.h back over to Windows, and make a couple
manual tweaks to account for the OS differences.
Not exactly elegant, but it seems to have worked.
Regards,
Bill
Timothy Hunter
> On 8/31/06, Timothy Hunter <TimH...@nc.rr.com> wrote:
>> Or you could just ask those who've done it. Kaspar Schiess did the Win32
>> versions of RMagick for several years. With practice he got it down to a
>> 2-day task. Brett DiFrischia did the latest version, 1.13.0. That one
>> took 6 weeks. One of the biggest problems (AFAIK) is RMagick's configure
>> script, which has easily over 100 feature tests and of course doesn't
>> work at all on Windows.
>
> downloadable VC++8.
>
> There are some ... changes there which aren't pleasant to deal with.
>
> -austin
Okay, I see.
Kaspar swears by mingw. Brett used VC++ 2003.
Timothy Hunter
>
> What I did was to install the same version of ImageMagick
> I wanted to use on Windows, on Linux. Then run RMagick's
> manual tweaks to account for the OS differences.
>
> Not exactly elegant, but it seems to have worked.
That's what Brett and I ended up doing.
Austin Ziegler
> versions of RMagick for several years. With practice he got it down to a
> 2-day task. Brett DiFrischia did the latest version, 1.13.0. That one
> took 6 weeks. One of the biggest problems (AFAIK) is RMagick's configure
> script, which has easily over 100 feature tests and of course doesn't
> work at all on Windows.
Sorry; I was specifically referring to making it work with the freely
downloadable VC++8.
There are some ... changes there which aren't pleasant to deal with.
-austin
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
> On 8/31/06, Timothy Hunter <TimH...@nc.rr.com> wrote:
>> Or you could just ask those who've done it. Kaspar Schiess did the Win32
>> versions of RMagick for several years. With practice he got it down to a
>> 2-day task. Brett DiFrischia did the latest version, 1.13.0. That one
>> took 6 weeks. One of the biggest problems (AFAIK) is RMagick's configure
>> script, which has easily over 100 feature tests and of course doesn't
>> work at all on Windows.
>
> Sorry; I was specifically referring to making it work with the freely
> downloadable VC++8.
>
> There are some ... changes there which aren't pleasant to deal with.
>
> -austin
*and* Instant Rails on a Windows box. I tried installing a source "gem"
and it complained about not having "nmake", so I'm further along than I
was. Visual Studio 8 aka express is already installed.
But then, I also installed Gentoo 2006.1 in a virtual machine today ...
it never hurts to have a Plan B. :)
Austin Ziegler
> Well, I finally bit the bullet and installed the one-click installer
> *and* Instant Rails on a Windows box. I tried installing a source "gem"
> and it complained about not having "nmake", so I'm further along than I
> was. Visual Studio 8 aka express is already installed.
>
> But then, I also installed Gentoo 2006.1 in a virtual machine today ...
> it never hurts to have a Plan B. :)
To get nmake etc. you'll need the Platform SDK (downloadable from a
link on the VS8 Express website), and then you'll get that. Be warned
that some source gems won't compile anyway, and even if they do, they
won't all work well with the One-Click Installer, which is based on a
much earlier compiler and runtime.
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
> On 8/31/06, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky <zn...@cesmail.net> wrote:
>> Well, I finally bit the bullet and installed the one-click installer
>> *and* Instant Rails on a Windows box. I tried installing a source "gem"
>> and it complained about not having "nmake", so I'm further along than I
>> was. Visual Studio 8 aka express is already installed.
>>
>> But then, I also installed Gentoo 2006.1 in a virtual machine today ...
>> it never hurts to have a Plan B. :)
>
> To get nmake etc. you'll need the Platform SDK (downloadable from a
> link on the VS8 Express website), and then you'll get that. Be warned
> that some source gems won't compile anyway, and even if they do, they
> won't all work well with the One-Click Installer, which is based on a
> much earlier compiler and runtime.
>
> -austin
I think I did download the SDK, or at least was offered the opportunity.
I had to move some "stuff" off the C: drive to make room, and I may have
forgotten to download the SDK in the process.
For what I'm planning to do with Ruby/Rails, it's not urgent that I be
able to build source gems. Right now, Ruby is a Perl
replacement/enhancement ... I'm the only one around that even cares
about Ruby, so I'm strictly using it only for one-offs that won't be
maintained by other people. Of course, I have to stop thinking in Perl. :)
The Rails application I have in mind is a little more interesting.
Again, since there aren't any other Rubyists around, I will need to be
careful, but Rails looks like a natural for it and I don't think there's
anything "Rails-like" for Perl.
While we're on the subject of One-click and Instant Rails, Curt ... is
there some reason there are two projects and not just one? I know
Instant Rails includes MySQL and Apache and carries an older version of
Ruby, but couldn't there just be one project -- "Instant Rails" -- with
the same version of Ruby and options to install MySQL, Apache, Rails,
FreeRide, Scite, etc.? Am I shooting myself in the foot by installing
them both?
Curt Hibbs
>
> While we're on the subject of One-click and Instant Rails, Curt ... is
> there some reason there are two projects and not just one? I know
> Instant Rails includes MySQL and Apache and carries an older version of
> Ruby, but couldn't there just be one project -- "Instant Rails" -- with
> the same version of Ruby and options to install MySQL, Apache, Rails,
> FreeRide, Scite, etc.? Am I shooting myself in the foot by installing
> them both?
The Ruby in Instant Rails *is* the current version of the One-Click
Installer... well, it was until I made this 1.8.5 release. The only
reason I haven't yet released an updated Instant Rails is that I am
currently in the middle to changes to move IR from using SCGI to use
Mongrel through mod_proxy. When that work is done there will be a new
release and it will, once again, be the current version of the OCI.
Curt
Curt Hibbs
I didn't answer your other questions...
You can install both IR and OCI. Whether or not this makes sense
really depends on what you do with Ruby. With OCI, you get things like
start menu entries and filetype associations. At some point we'll
implement an IR command that will create these same registry entries
on request.
If you install both, you might need to remember to install extensions
and RubyGems in both copies of Ruby (unless you specifically wanted a
particular package only in one of them).
Jan Svitok
> and it complained about not having "nmake", so I'm further along than I
> was. Visual Studio 8 aka express is already installed.
On full VC8/7/6 (I haven't tried the Express edition) there is a batch
file vcvars32.bat or vsvars.bat (depending on VC version) that sets
paths to nmake, cl, sets include paths, etc. in a cmd session call
this batch file prior to calling gem install.
You obviously don't need to do this, if you have nmake et al. on the
path already.
The dir where this file is located is something like
%ProgramFiles%\Microsoft Visual Studio XXX\VC8\bin.
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
> I didn't answer your other questions...
>
> You can install both IR and OCI. Whether or not this makes sense
> really depends on what you do with Ruby. With OCI, you get things like
> start menu entries and filetype associations. At some point we'll
> implement an IR command that will create these same registry entries
> on request.
>
> If you install both, you might need to remember to install extensions
> and RubyGems in both copies of Ruby (unless you specifically wanted a
> particular package only in one of them).
Windows did everything I need in a native manner, I wouldn't need
CygWin, VMware Server running Gentoo, ActiveState Perl, Python and Tcl,
etc. :)
In the long run, I think Instant Rails (including Mongrel, of course)
plus the start menu entries and filetype associations with options not
to install MySQL and Apache is the way to go. Apache is overkill for the
applications I'm going to build, and my environment strongly prefers SQL
Server and PostgreSQL over MySQL. So I can get where I want to go by
loading OCI and doing "gem install rails", or by installing IR and
ignoring MySQL and Apache.
Does Rails work with IIS? That's another "strong environmental preference."
John Lam
working on getting Rails to run natively on top of http.sys - so you
don't even need IIS - you just need XP SP2 which installs http.sys by
default. That's great for XP dev so you don't need IIS to be installed
on your XP install.
On 9/1/06, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky <zn...@cesmail.net> wrote:
Christian Neukirchen
> This release upgrades Ruby to the recently
> released version 1.8.5.
Partly OT, but I'll ask anyway: Does anybody out there have NArray
binaries suitable for running on the One-Click Installer?
Thanks in advance,
--
Christian Neukirchen <chneuk...@gmail.com> http://chneukirchen.org
Daniel Berger
> "Curt Hibbs" <ml.c...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>
>> This release upgrades Ruby to the recently
>> released version 1.8.5.
>>
>
> Partly OT, but I'll ask anyway: Does anybody out there have NArray
> binaries suitable for running on the One-Click Installer?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
Regards,
Dan
Bon Sid
> Christian Neukirchen wrote:
>> Thanks in advance,
>>
> http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=5605&group_id=1177&atid=4626
>
> Regards,
>
> Dan
Hi
I have just discovered ruby and was interested to see what its
mathematical capabilities were, and also being mainly a Windows XP user,
i decided to setup using the one-click installer.
I have placed the narray.so in the C:\ruby\lib\ruby\1.8\i386-mswin32
directory
and have tried running a mandelbrot sample that i found here
http://narray.rubyforge.org/demo/mandel.html.en.
Cut/Copy the example into the RDE i get the follewing error,
c:/ruby/lib/ruby/1.8/i386-mswin32/narray.so: no such file to load --
narray_ext.rb (LoadError)
from c:/ruby/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/custom_require.rb:27:in
`require'
from C:/Documents and Settings/Boz/Desktop/mand.rb:1
Completed(1)
Is there a path that i have to set somewhere or something else?
also the original example uses a library called nimage to display the
mandelbrot set, this doesnt seem to be available for the one-click
installer from what i can tell. Are there any other ways that i can
display the image using Ruby?
I have a very strong Matlab background and am just curious to see what i
can do with this new thing called Ruby.
Any help is appreciated.
cheers
B
Christian Neukirchen
Daniel Berger
> Daniel Berger wrote:
> > Christian Neukirchen wrote:
> >> Thanks in advance,
> >>
> > http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=5605&group_id=1177&atid=4626
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Dan
>
> Hi
>
> I have just discovered ruby and was interested to see what its
> mathematical capabilities were, and also being mainly a Windows XP user,
> i decided to setup using the one-click installer.
>
> I have placed the narray.so in the C:\ruby\lib\ruby\1.8\i386-mswin32
> directory
> and have tried running a mandelbrot sample that i found here
> http://narray.rubyforge.org/demo/mandel.html.en.
>
> Cut/Copy the example into the RDE i get the follewing error,
>
> c:/ruby/lib/ruby/1.8/i386-mswin32/narray.so: no such file to load --
> narray_ext.rb (LoadError)
> from c:/ruby/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/custom_require.rb:27:in
> `require'
> from C:/Documents and Settings/Boz/Desktop/mand.rb:1
> Completed(1)
It seems that the narray package also comes with some pure Ruby libs as
well. You'll need to download the tarball and install those.
Regards,
Dan
John W. Kennedy
> This release upgrades Ruby to the recently
> have also been upgraded to newly released
> versions, but other than that, everything else is
> the same as the 1.8.4 release. You can download it
> here:
>
> http://rubyforge.org/frs/?group_id=167
>
> If you use the Breakpointer package with Ruby on
> Rails, then you should stay with 1.8.4 because
> 1.8.5 contains a change that breaks this package.
Either One-click 1.8.5-21 or the IFMapper 1.0 gem is seriously busted.
(IFMapper got upgraded from 0.9.something only recently, so both
upgrades hit my system at once.) If I start it directly from
IFMapper.rbw, nothing seems to happen. If I type "ruby IFMapper.rbw" I
get a gazillion errors.
--
John W. Kennedy
"The blind rulers of Logres
Nourished the land on a fallacy of rational virtue."
-- Charles Williams. "Taliessin through Logres: Prelude"
Bon Sid
> Bon Sid wrote:
>> Hi
>> Cut/Copy the example into the RDE i get the follewing error,
>>
>> c:/ruby/lib/ruby/1.8/i386-mswin32/narray.so: no such file to load --
>> narray_ext.rb (LoadError)
>> from c:/ruby/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/custom_require.rb:27:in
>> `require'
>> from C:/Documents and Settings/Boz/Desktop/mand.rb:1
>> Completed(1)
>
> It seems that the narray package also comes with some pure Ruby libs as
> well. You'll need to download the tarball and install those.
>
> Regards,
>
> Dan
Thanks Dan!
Indeed there were two lib files with the narray tarball which i copied
into
c:\ruby\lib\ruby\1.8, now running the previous mandelbrot code seems to
work!
Now that i read the previous error message again i see that in hindsight
my eyes read "narray.so: no such file to load --" and stopped there,
thinking thats crazy, of course it read "no such file to load
--narray_ext.rb" , my mistake :)
Do you have any idea on how to display this output as an image, and is
there a chance you know how to do FFT's ? I've downloaded
http://www.ir.isas.ac.jp/~masa/ruby/dist/ruby-fftw3-0.1.0.tar.gz , but
i'm lost right about there, i guess i need to download the source from
fftw.org and then do some kind of magic with MSVC++6 where i end up with
fftw.so or somesuch?
I basically just want to do something like, image(abs(fft(data))) , is
this too much to ask at this stage of Ruby windows one-click version?
All this compiling of libs has me stumped a little, and about the only C
i do is when i write MEX files in Matlab.
thanks once again
b