From luislavena at gmail.com Thu Jan 8 22:04:19 2009 From: luislavena at gmail.com (Luis Lavena) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 01:04:19 -0200 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] [ANN] rake-compiler 0.3.1 Released Message-ID: <71166b3b0901081904m7df618cek96c6dc78ad248ff@mail.gmail.com> rake-compiler version 0.3.1 has been released! * * = rake-compiler rake-compiler aims to help Gem developers while dealing with Ruby C extensions, simplifiying the code and reducing the duplication. It follows *convention over configuration* and set an standarized structure to build and package C extensions in your gems. This is the result of expriences dealing with several Gems that required native extensions across platforms and different user configurations where details like portability and clarity of code were lacking. == An Overview Let's summarize what rake-compiler provides: * No custom rake tasks required. Less code duplication and errors. * Painlessly build extensions on different platforms (Linux, OSX and Windows). * Allow multiple extensions be compiled inside the same gem. * Mimics RubyGems installation process, so helps as test environment. * Simplify cross platform compilation of extensions (target Windows from Linux). Changes: === 0.3.1 / 2009-01-09 * 2 Minor Enhancements: * Download cross-ruby source code using HTTP instead of FTP. * Disabled Tcl/Tk extension building on cross-ruby (helps with 1.9). * 3 Bug fixes: * Workaround bug introduced by lack of Gem::Specification cloning. Fixes DM LH #757. * Use proper binary extension on OSX (reported by Dirkjan Bussink). * Ensure lib/binary task is defined prior clear of requisites. -- Luis Lavena AREA 17 - Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but rather when there is nothing more to take away. Antoine de Saint-Exup?ry From luislavena at gmail.com Wed Jan 14 20:23:04 2009 From: luislavena at gmail.com (Luis Lavena) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 23:23:04 -0200 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] [Rubyinstaller-users] Installer for ruby1.8.7 - any chance? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <71166b3b0901141723r17997b9dhfa9970d7eb61acc4@mail.gmail.com> 2009/1/14 Rados?aw Bu?at : > Hello. Hello there! > Any chance that there will be available Ruby OneClickInstaller for > 1.8.7? I would be happy with that. Don't want to disappoint you but no. Please let me explain the point. Current One-Click Ruby Installer (OCI) is bundle of several parts to make Ruby work out of the box in Windows. Those parts (or components) are around 35 ranging from C extensions that need to be compiled to bundled Gems. All these moving parts needs to be manually tested, which on every release take me around 10 hours of work. Even after, new things show up. Some of these components hasn't been updated since 1.8.4 or even before, yet still are keep for compatibility between previous releases. 1.8.7 bring several modifications from 1.9 branch, which are not compatible with the code of gems, libraries and even C extensions. This has produced difficult times to developers of projects like wxRuby, RMagick and others, since lot of users started to complain of such incompatibilities when using their libraries. I personally had really bad experience using it for my projects and reverted back to the safe 1.8.6 As you can imagine, these points are just the tip of the iceberg in relation to 1.8.7 Now, what will happen, you may ask? I've been working, in help with other developers in move OCI from Visual C compiler to MinGW. There are plenty of good reasons for the move which I've commented several times in my blog[1] and mailing lists around the tubes. Our main target versions of Ruby are 1.8.6 and 1.9.1, since most of the gems developers are updating their gems to take advantage of 1.9 functions at the time they add guards around "1.8.x" code. Even gem developers ignore 1.8.7 for the above mentioned incompatibilities. As a closing, contrary to official Ruby site considering 1.8.7 latest stable, the development community differs. I hope this shed some light in the 1.8.7 One-Click Ruby Installer topic. If you have any particular reasons for 1.8.7 that I'm ignoring, please share with us and let's workout a way that we can help you out. Regards, [1] http://blog.mmediasys.com -- Luis Lavena AREA 17 - Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but rather when there is nothing more to take away. Antoine de Saint-Exup?ry From rogerpack2005 at gmail.com Wed Jan 21 17:33:24 2009 From: rogerpack2005 at gmail.com (Roger Pack) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 15:33:24 -0700 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] musings Message-ID: <966599840901211433q1947daa7sb64a01337a11f39d@mail.gmail.com> Hi all. A few musings: re: GPL versus MIT. I suppose you could have the installer actually download mingw+msys at install time, and thus you wouldn't be distributing GPL code. Either that or the gem way. I'd be happy to help with the gem one. re: rake-compiler Does this integrate with newgem at all? Note: with rubyinstaller currently I get [when I run rake] ... mv zlib1.dll bin cd - cd sandbox/ruby_1_8 patching file `dln.c' patching file `process.c' patching file `array.c' patching file `bignum.c' patching file `eval.c' patching file `intern.h' patching file `io.c' patching file `lib/webrick/httpservlet/filehandler.rb' Hunk #1 FAILED at 163. Hunk #2 succeeded at 232 with fuzz 2 (offset 33 lines). Hunk #3 FAILED at 306. Hunk #4 FAILED at 360. 3 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to lib/webrick/httpservlet/filehandler.rb.rej patching file `sprintf.c' patching file `string.c' rake aborted! is this expected? Thanks. -=r From luislavena at gmail.com Wed Jan 21 18:22:12 2009 From: luislavena at gmail.com (Luis Lavena) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 21:22:12 -0200 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] musings In-Reply-To: <966599840901211433q1947daa7sb64a01337a11f39d@mail.gmail.com> References: <966599840901211433q1947daa7sb64a01337a11f39d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <71166b3b0901211522n32ad61fcj36cbd3deb5215035@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 8:33 PM, Roger Pack wrote: > Hi all. > > A few musings: > > re: GPL versus MIT. I suppose you could have the installer actually > download mingw+msys at install time, and thus you wouldn't be > distributing GPL code. Either that or the gem way. I'd be happy to > help with the gem one. > the devkit gem will take the recipes from rubyinstaller and download the gcc+msys, put the proper batch files into ruby bindir and it's done ;-) > re: rake-compiler > Does this integrate with newgem at all? newgem? DrNic package? is not using nothing like that, own baked recipes. The idea of rake-compiler reduce the need for me to tackle projects and provide Windows gems. I thought will be much better option and more sustainable in the long run. It also will play nice with some things I'm playing with, like building One-Click Installer almost fully from Linux. > Note: > with rubyinstaller currently I get [when I run rake] > > ... > mv zlib1.dll bin > cd - > cd sandbox/ruby_1_8 > patching file `dln.c' > patching file `process.c' > patching file `array.c' > patching file `bignum.c' > patching file `eval.c' > patching file `intern.h' > patching file `io.c' > patching file `lib/webrick/httpservlet/filehandler.rb' > Hunk #1 FAILED at 163. > Hunk #2 succeeded at 232 with fuzz 2 (offset 33 lines). > Hunk #3 FAILED at 306. > Hunk #4 FAILED at 360. > 3 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to > lib/webrick/httpservlet/filehandler.rb.rej > patching file `sprintf.c' > patching file `string.c' > rake aborted! > > is this expected? > maybe there is something during patch, which version is trying to patch? p114? p287? > Thanks. > -=r Thanks to you for the feedback -- Luis Lavena AREA 17 - Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but rather when there is nothing more to take away. Antoine de Saint-Exup?ry From rogerpack2005 at gmail.com Sat Jan 24 16:13:47 2009 From: rogerpack2005 at gmail.com (Roger Pack) Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 14:13:47 -0700 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] musings In-Reply-To: <71166b3b0901211522n32ad61fcj36cbd3deb5215035@mail.gmail.com> References: <966599840901211433q1947daa7sb64a01337a11f39d@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901211522n32ad61fcj36cbd3deb5215035@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <966599840901241313k26067392y7776e7014dab6c@mail.gmail.com> > The idea of rake-compiler reduce the need for me to tackle projects > and provide Windows gems. I thought will be much better option and > more sustainable in the long run. > > It also will play nice with some things I'm playing with, like > building One-Click Installer almost fully from Linux. Nice :) I suppose one thing people could do [if it were possible] is specify a windows dependency of the devkit gem if they don't want to have to compile it themselves [and if it works]. >> is this expected? >> > > maybe there is something during patch, which version is trying to > patch? p114? p287? This was with straight git clone then rake--I assume that's 114? I am wondering if it would be possible to publish "alpha" releases, like mingw OCI 1.8.7, 1.9.1 preview2, etc. Just mark them as alpha and warn people about them. Thoughts? -=r From luislavena at gmail.com Sun Jan 25 17:57:50 2009 From: luislavena at gmail.com (Luis Lavena) Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 20:57:50 -0200 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] musings In-Reply-To: <966599840901241313k26067392y7776e7014dab6c@mail.gmail.com> References: <966599840901211433q1947daa7sb64a01337a11f39d@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901211522n32ad61fcj36cbd3deb5215035@mail.gmail.com> <966599840901241313k26067392y7776e7014dab6c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <71166b3b0901251457y35d142c5n7ab2babd7037d9c0@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 7:13 PM, Roger Pack wrote: >> The idea of rake-compiler reduce the need for me to tackle projects >> and provide Windows gems. I thought will be much better option and >> more sustainable in the long run. >> >> It also will play nice with some things I'm playing with, like >> building One-Click Installer almost fully from Linux. > > Nice :) > I suppose one thing people could do [if it were possible] is specify a > windows dependency of the devkit gem if they don't want to have to > compile it themselves [and if it works]. > Please apologize but I fully don't understand your statement. Can you rephrase it? >>> is this expected? >>> >> >> maybe there is something during patch, which version is trying to >> patch? p114? p287? > > This was with straight git clone then rake--I assume that's 114? > Yes, p114 was the altest one, but the way it applies the patches was not perfect. > > I am wondering if it would be possible to publish "alpha" releases, > like mingw OCI 1.8.7, 1.9.1 preview2, etc. > Just mark them as alpha and warn people about them. > Thoughts? > -=r Neither 1.8.7 or 1.9.1-preview2 builds properly for me (native or cross-compiling). Opened some tickets that got addressed. I have no interest in 1.8.7, honestly. 1.8.6 and newer patchelevels will be my target for 1.8.x The other time will be 1.9.x Problem with 1.9 is that I cannot use the same recipes to build both, there are several changes that need to be manually handled right now. -- Luis Lavena AREA 17 - Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but rather when there is nothing more to take away. Antoine de Saint-Exup?ry From rogerpack2005 at gmail.com Mon Jan 26 12:42:56 2009 From: rogerpack2005 at gmail.com (Roger Pack) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 10:42:56 -0700 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] musings In-Reply-To: <71166b3b0901251457y35d142c5n7ab2babd7037d9c0@mail.gmail.com> References: <966599840901211433q1947daa7sb64a01337a11f39d@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901211522n32ad61fcj36cbd3deb5215035@mail.gmail.com> <966599840901241313k26067392y7776e7014dab6c@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901251457y35d142c5n7ab2babd7037d9c0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <966599840901260942p4da55b66n6de00fb72567f7df@mail.gmail.com> >> I suppose one thing people could do [if it were possible] is specify a >> windows dependency of the devkit gem if they don't want to have to >> compile it themselves [and if it works]. >> > > Please apologize but I fully don't understand your statement. Can you > rephrase it? I was thinking out loud that for gems that compile out of the box in a mingw environment, they could add a dependency to the devkit gem [then the author's wouldn't have to worry about cross compiling their own binary extensions--i.e. it would be a useful gem for authors]. re: trouble compiling I have had trouble building them, too. Typically I have had success building them if I use the daily snapshot or the 187p72.tar.gz download. I haven't tried the preview releases. It is too bad that trunk requires autoconf version > 1.60, so am forced to use the snapshots [ugh]. Not that I want 187 more than 186 at all. Unless the MBARI patches make their way to 187 only and not 186, then I would prefer the former. A question: with 187p72 build I get 01/21/2009 04:41 PM 17,290,874 libmsvcrt-ruby18-static.a which is a rather large file--I'd guess that's expected? [and with 1.9 it's something like 30MB]. ? Thanks! -=r From joaopedrosa at gmail.com Mon Jan 26 15:40:01 2009 From: joaopedrosa at gmail.com (Joao Pedrosa) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 17:40:01 -0300 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] musings In-Reply-To: <966599840901260942p4da55b66n6de00fb72567f7df@mail.gmail.com> References: <966599840901211433q1947daa7sb64a01337a11f39d@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901211522n32ad61fcj36cbd3deb5215035@mail.gmail.com> <966599840901241313k26067392y7776e7014dab6c@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901251457y35d142c5n7ab2babd7037d9c0@mail.gmail.com> <966599840901260942p4da55b66n6de00fb72567f7df@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Hi, > A question: > > with 187p72 build I get > 01/21/2009 04:41 PM 17,290,874 libmsvcrt-ruby18-static.a > which is a rather large file--I'd guess that's expected? [and with 1.9 > it's something like 30MB]. > ? I just spent the last few days fiddling with Ruby compilation on Windows, and these are the latest numbers I get with compiling the latest versions of Ruby found in the SVN repositories: A) Built with MinGW and GCC 4, including openssl, iconv, zlib, readline: C:\>dir C:\opt\mingw_ruby-1.8.6\lib\libmsvcrt-ruby18-static.a 25/01/2009 23:59 2.594.308 libmsvcrt-ruby18-static.a C:\>dir C:\opt\mingw_ruby-1.8.7\lib\libmsvcrt-ruby18-static.a 26/01/2009 00:20 2.735.214 libmsvcrt-ruby18-static.a C:\>dir C:\opt\mingw_ruby-1.9.1\lib\libmsvcrt-ruby191-static.a 26/01/2009 00:33 5.097.338 libmsvcrt-ruby191-static.a C:\>dir C:\opt\mingw_ruby-1.9.2\lib\libmsvcrt-ruby191-static.a 26/01/2009 01:00 5.131.112 libmsvcrt-ruby191-static.a B) Built with VS C++ 2008, including openssl, iconv, zlib (no readline): C:\>dir C:\opt\ruby-1.8.6\lib\msvcr90-ruby18-static.lib 26/01/2009 16:20 2.155.482 msvcr90-ruby18-static.lib C:\>dir C:\opt\ruby-1.8.7\lib\msvcr90-ruby18-static.lib 26/01/2009 16:47 2.155.482 msvcr90-ruby18-static.lib That's just for comparison purposes, I'd guess. :-) To install my MinGW environment I followed the instructions found at http://www.mingw.org/wiki/HOWTO_Install_the_MinGW_GCC_Compiler_Suite I use MSYS which has a HOWTO tutorial linked to from the MinGW one. Plus, I downloaded any missing binaries from http://gnuwin32.sourceforge.net/ The files I installed include: C:\>dir safe_or_not\programming\mingw 29/11/2008 04:29 8.944.043 binutils-2.19-mingw32-rc1-bin.tar.gz 29/11/2008 04:32 54.186.135 gcc-4.3.0-20080502-mingw32-alpha-bin.7z 29/11/2008 04:22 6.677.497 gcc-part-c++-4.3.0-20080502-2-mingw32-alpha-bin.tar.gz 29/11/2008 04:22 8.077.458 gcc-part-core-4.3.0-20080502-2-mingw32-alpha-bin.tar.gz 29/11/2008 04:28 560.294 mingwrt-3.15.1-mingw32.tar.gz 29/11/2008 04:30 1.643.172 w32api-3.12-mingw32-dev.tar.gz C:\>dir safe_or_not\programming\mingw\msys 29/11/2008 06:50 1.195.259 autoconf-2.63.tar.bz2 29/11/2008 06:50 936.322 automake-1.10.2.tar.bz2 29/11/2008 06:09 543.655 bash-3.1-MSYS-1.0.11-1.tar.bz2 29/11/2008 06:12 832.147 coreutils-5.97-MSYS-1.0.11-snapshot.tar.bz2 29/11/2008 06:51 13.137.920 libtool-2.2.6a.tar.gz 29/11/2008 06:13 89.315 lzma-4.43-MSYS-1.0.11-1-bin.tar.gz 29/11/2008 06:56 134.927 m4-1.4.7-MSYS.tar.bz2 29/11/2008 05:24 2.808.061 MSYS-1.0.10.exe 29/11/2008 05:44 1.935.914 msysCORE-1.0.11-2007.01.19-1.tar.bz2 29/11/2008 05:38 10.299.560 msysDTK-1.0.1.exe C:\>dir safe_or_not\programming\mingw\gnuwin32 30/11/2008 00:20 585.372 bison-2.1-bin.zip 30/11/2008 01:26 708.206 bison-2.1-dep.zip 01/12/2008 02:47 49.414 byacc-1.9-1-bin.zip 30/11/2008 02:24 262.813 sed-4.1.5-bin.zip 30/11/2008 02:24 708.206 sed-4.1.5-dep.zip C:\>dir safe_or_not\pogramming\mingw\gnuwin32\libs 25/01/2009 13:56 25.917 crypt-2.2.5-bin.zip 25/01/2009 01:48 19.846 crypt-2.2.5-lib.zip 25/01/2009 21:51 828.380 libiconv-1.9.2-1-bin.zip 25/01/2009 21:50 50.981 libiconv-1.9.2-1-dep.zip 25/01/2009 21:51 731.496 libiconv-1.9.2-1-lib.zip 14/01/2009 12:03 5.906.403 openssl-0.9.8h-1-bin.zip 14/01/2009 12:02 1.287.741 openssl-0.9.8h-1-lib.zip 14/01/2009 12:00 443.791 readline-5.0-1-bin.zip 14/01/2009 12:01 233.419 readline-5.0-1-lib.zip 25/01/2009 13:34 99.777 zlib-1.2.3-bin.zip 25/01/2009 01:20 71.569 zlib-1.2.3-lib.zip Some of the library files I share between VS C++ 2008 and MinGW, but the MinGW ones I tend to copy to the c:\mingw directory, in order for libs, headers to be easily found. MSYS includes the "sed" command already so skip installing it for MinGW, otherwise it can result in an error of conflict. But "sed" might be needed for VS C++ 2008 compilation, alongside Bison or YACC depending on the Ruby version (1.8, 1.9). You might need to copy yacc to byacc to make the Ruby building routines to find it. For compiling with VS C++ 2008 you don't need "autoconf" tools. The problem with VS C++ is getting the "readline" extension built, because I don't think it's supported. If anyone knows what to do to get it built, I am all ears. :-) At times you might need to rename a library file like libiconv.lib to iconv.lib for the extension setup to detect it, when using VS C++. I got my openssl for VS C++ from http://www.slproweb.com/products/Win32OpenSSL.html And had to edit one of its files to make a conflicting error with VS C++ to go away: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=1700&user=guest&pass=guest Finally, for the openssl, zlib, iconv, readline libraries to work, you might need to copy them to Ruby's bin dir: C:\>dir \opt\ruby-1.8.6\bin\*.dll 07/01/2009 18:27 1.016.832 libeay32.dll 14/10/2004 00:08 978.432 libiconv2.dll 09/10/2004 18:25 101.888 libintl3.dll 03/09/2008 22:49 232.960 libssl32.dll 26/01/2009 16:23 707.072 msvcr90-ruby18.dll 07/01/2009 18:27 200.192 ssleay32.dll 20/07/2005 18:05 75.264 zlib1.dll I am not 100% sure about which of those DLL files I could safely remove from the Ruby bin dir, though. :-) There might be some excess there, I mean. To test which libraries are loading after building a Ruby version, I use the simple: PS C:\> C:\opt\ruby-1.8.6\bin\ruby.exe -v -rzlib -riconv -ropenssl -e "p 5" ruby 1.8.6 (2009-01-26 patchlevel 310) [i386-mswin32_90] 5 So no apparent errors there, huh? Why am I doing this? I figure this could help with motivating other folks when they get stuck building Ruby on Windows. :-) I wish I could make all of that more automatic, but it's tough business. Cheers, Joao From rogerpack2005 at gmail.com Mon Jan 26 15:58:38 2009 From: rogerpack2005 at gmail.com (Roger Pack) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 13:58:38 -0700 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] musings In-Reply-To: References: <966599840901211433q1947daa7sb64a01337a11f39d@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901211522n32ad61fcj36cbd3deb5215035@mail.gmail.com> <966599840901241313k26067392y7776e7014dab6c@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901251457y35d142c5n7ab2babd7037d9c0@mail.gmail.com> <966599840901260942p4da55b66n6de00fb72567f7df@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <966599840901261258h31432965me00ad3828117d9f4@mail.gmail.com> >> with 187p72 build I get >> 01/21/2009 04:41 PM 17,290,874 libmsvcrt-ruby18-static.a >> which is a rather large file--I'd guess that's expected? [and with 1.9 >> it's something like 30MB]. >> ? > > I just spent the last few days fiddling with Ruby compilation on Windows, > and these are the latest numbers I get with compiling the latest versions > of Ruby found in the SVN repositories: > > A) Built with MinGW and GCC 4, including openssl, iconv, zlib, readline: > > C:\>dir C:\opt\mingw_ruby-1.8.6\lib\libmsvcrt-ruby18-static.a > 25/01/2009 23:59 2.594.308 libmsvcrt-ruby18-static.a Wow those are far smaller than mine--I wonder why? I am using GCC 3 maybe that's it. Have you tried the rubyinstaller scripts? What size are they? Take care. -=r From luislavena at gmail.com Mon Jan 26 16:00:48 2009 From: luislavena at gmail.com (Luis Lavena) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:00:48 -0200 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] musings In-Reply-To: <966599840901260942p4da55b66n6de00fb72567f7df@mail.gmail.com> References: <966599840901211433q1947daa7sb64a01337a11f39d@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901211522n32ad61fcj36cbd3deb5215035@mail.gmail.com> <966599840901241313k26067392y7776e7014dab6c@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901251457y35d142c5n7ab2babd7037d9c0@mail.gmail.com> <966599840901260942p4da55b66n6de00fb72567f7df@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <71166b3b0901261300o16ccd9e4uf3dd7e96fa534aab@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 3:42 PM, Roger Pack wrote: >>> I suppose one thing people could do [if it were possible] is specify a >>> windows dependency of the devkit gem if they don't want to have to >>> compile it themselves [and if it works]. >>> >> >> Please apologize but I fully don't understand your statement. Can you >> rephrase it? > > I was thinking out loud that for gems that compile out of the box in a > mingw environment, they could add a dependency to the devkit gem [then > the author's wouldn't have to worry about cross compiling their own > binary extensions--i.e. it would be a useful gem for authors]. > > re: trouble compiling > > I have had trouble building them, too. > > Typically I have had success building them if I use the daily snapshot > or the 187p72.tar.gz download. I haven't tried the preview releases. > It is too bad that trunk requires autoconf version > 1.60, so am > forced to use the snapshots [ugh]. > > Not that I want 187 more than 186 at all. Unless the MBARI patches > make their way to 187 only and not 186, then I would prefer the > former. > Again, no 1.8.7 from the official One-Click side. If you want to shoot your feet, go ahead and use the recipes :-) > A question: > > with 187p72 build I get > 01/21/2009 04:41 PM 17,290,874 libmsvcrt-ruby18-static.a > which is a rather large file--I'd guess that's expected? [and with 1.9 > it's something like 30MB]. > ? The library is 'as-is' without stripping debug symbols or anything. > > Thanks! > > -=r > _______________________________________________ > Rubyinstaller-devel mailing list > Rubyinstaller-devel at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubyinstaller-devel > -- Luis Lavena AREA 17 - Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but rather when there is nothing more to take away. Antoine de Saint-Exup?ry From luislavena at gmail.com Mon Jan 26 16:09:04 2009 From: luislavena at gmail.com (Luis Lavena) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:09:04 -0200 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] musings In-Reply-To: References: <966599840901211433q1947daa7sb64a01337a11f39d@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901211522n32ad61fcj36cbd3deb5215035@mail.gmail.com> <966599840901241313k26067392y7776e7014dab6c@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901251457y35d142c5n7ab2babd7037d9c0@mail.gmail.com> <966599840901260942p4da55b66n6de00fb72567f7df@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <71166b3b0901261309p38342451w38a4a92bf11c3834@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Joao Pedrosa wrote: > Hi, > >> A question: >> >> with 187p72 build I get >> 01/21/2009 04:41 PM 17,290,874 libmsvcrt-ruby18-static.a >> which is a rather large file--I'd guess that's expected? [and with 1.9 >> it's something like 30MB]. >> ? > > I just spent the last few days fiddling with Ruby compilation on Windows, > and these are the latest numbers I get with compiling the latest versions > of Ruby found in the SVN repositories: > > A) Built with MinGW and GCC 4, including openssl, iconv, zlib, readline: > > C:\>dir C:\opt\mingw_ruby-1.8.6\lib\libmsvcrt-ruby18-static.a > 25/01/2009 23:59 2.594.308 libmsvcrt-ruby18-static.a > > C:\>dir C:\opt\mingw_ruby-1.8.7\lib\libmsvcrt-ruby18-static.a > 26/01/2009 00:20 2.735.214 libmsvcrt-ruby18-static.a > > C:\>dir C:\opt\mingw_ruby-1.9.1\lib\libmsvcrt-ruby191-static.a > 26/01/2009 00:33 5.097.338 libmsvcrt-ruby191-static.a > > C:\>dir C:\opt\mingw_ruby-1.9.2\lib\libmsvcrt-ruby191-static.a > 26/01/2009 01:00 5.131.112 libmsvcrt-ruby191-static.a > > B) Built with VS C++ 2008, including openssl, iconv, zlib (no readline): > > C:\>dir C:\opt\ruby-1.8.6\lib\msvcr90-ruby18-static.lib > 26/01/2009 16:20 2.155.482 msvcr90-ruby18-static.lib > > C:\>dir C:\opt\ruby-1.8.7\lib\msvcr90-ruby18-static.lib > 26/01/2009 16:47 2.155.482 msvcr90-ruby18-static.lib > > > That's just for comparison purposes, I'd guess. :-) > > To install my MinGW environment I followed the instructions found at > http://www.mingw.org/wiki/HOWTO_Install_the_MinGW_GCC_Compiler_Suite > > I use MSYS which has a HOWTO tutorial linked to from the MinGW one. > > Plus, I downloaded any missing binaries from http://gnuwin32.sourceforge.net/ > Woot, you took the long road... why didn't played with the mingw recipes? The size of the static library is not a isse, you can still do strip of the symbol and get a smaller version. > The files I installed include: > > C:\>dir safe_or_not\programming\mingw > > 29/11/2008 04:29 8.944.043 binutils-2.19-mingw32-rc1-bin.tar.gz > 29/11/2008 04:32 54.186.135 gcc-4.3.0-20080502-mingw32-alpha-bin.7z > 29/11/2008 04:22 6.677.497 > gcc-part-c++-4.3.0-20080502-2-mingw32-alpha-bin.tar.gz > 29/11/2008 04:22 8.077.458 > gcc-part-core-4.3.0-20080502-2-mingw32-alpha-bin.tar.gz > 29/11/2008 04:28 560.294 mingwrt-3.15.1-mingw32.tar.gz > 29/11/2008 04:30 1.643.172 w32api-3.12-mingw32-dev.tar.gz > > C:\>dir safe_or_not\programming\mingw\msys > > 29/11/2008 06:50 1.195.259 autoconf-2.63.tar.bz2 > 29/11/2008 06:50 936.322 automake-1.10.2.tar.bz2 > 29/11/2008 06:09 543.655 bash-3.1-MSYS-1.0.11-1.tar.bz2 > 29/11/2008 06:12 832.147 coreutils-5.97-MSYS-1.0.11-snapshot.tar.bz2 > 29/11/2008 06:51 13.137.920 libtool-2.2.6a.tar.gz > 29/11/2008 06:13 89.315 lzma-4.43-MSYS-1.0.11-1-bin.tar.gz > 29/11/2008 06:56 134.927 m4-1.4.7-MSYS.tar.bz2 > 29/11/2008 05:24 2.808.061 MSYS-1.0.10.exe > 29/11/2008 05:44 1.935.914 msysCORE-1.0.11-2007.01.19-1.tar.bz2 > 29/11/2008 05:38 10.299.560 msysDTK-1.0.1.exe > > C:\>dir safe_or_not\programming\mingw\gnuwin32 > > 30/11/2008 00:20 585.372 bison-2.1-bin.zip > 30/11/2008 01:26 708.206 bison-2.1-dep.zip > 01/12/2008 02:47 49.414 byacc-1.9-1-bin.zip > 30/11/2008 02:24 262.813 sed-4.1.5-bin.zip > 30/11/2008 02:24 708.206 sed-4.1.5-dep.zip > > C:\>dir safe_or_not\pogramming\mingw\gnuwin32\libs > > 25/01/2009 13:56 25.917 crypt-2.2.5-bin.zip > 25/01/2009 01:48 19.846 crypt-2.2.5-lib.zip > 25/01/2009 21:51 828.380 libiconv-1.9.2-1-bin.zip > 25/01/2009 21:50 50.981 libiconv-1.9.2-1-dep.zip > 25/01/2009 21:51 731.496 libiconv-1.9.2-1-lib.zip > 14/01/2009 12:03 5.906.403 openssl-0.9.8h-1-bin.zip > 14/01/2009 12:02 1.287.741 openssl-0.9.8h-1-lib.zip > 14/01/2009 12:00 443.791 readline-5.0-1-bin.zip > 14/01/2009 12:01 233.419 readline-5.0-1-lib.zip > 25/01/2009 13:34 99.777 zlib-1.2.3-bin.zip > 25/01/2009 01:20 71.569 zlib-1.2.3-lib.zip > > > Some of the library files I share between VS C++ 2008 and MinGW, > but the MinGW ones I tend to copy to the c:\mingw directory, in > order for libs, headers to be easily found. MSYS includes the > "sed" command already so skip installing it for MinGW, otherwise > it can result in an error of conflict. > > But "sed" might be needed for VS C++ 2008 compilation, alongside > Bison or YACC depending on the Ruby version (1.8, 1.9). You might > need to copy yacc to byacc to make the Ruby building routines to > find it. For compiling with VS C++ 2008 you don't need "autoconf" tools. > > The problem with VS C++ is getting the "readline" extension built, because > I don't think it's supported. If anyone knows what to do to get it built, I am > all ears. :-) > > At times you might need to rename a library file like libiconv.lib to iconv.lib > for the extension setup to detect it, when using VS C++. > > I got my openssl for VS C++ from > http://www.slproweb.com/products/Win32OpenSSL.html > > And had to edit one of its files to make a conflicting error with VS > C++ to go away: > http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=1700&user=guest&pass=guest > > Finally, for the openssl, zlib, iconv, readline libraries to work, you > might need > to copy them to Ruby's bin dir: > > C:\>dir \opt\ruby-1.8.6\bin\*.dll > > 07/01/2009 18:27 1.016.832 libeay32.dll > 14/10/2004 00:08 978.432 libiconv2.dll > 09/10/2004 18:25 101.888 libintl3.dll > 03/09/2008 22:49 232.960 libssl32.dll > 26/01/2009 16:23 707.072 msvcr90-ruby18.dll > 07/01/2009 18:27 200.192 ssleay32.dll > 20/07/2005 18:05 75.264 zlib1.dll > > I am not 100% sure about which of those DLL files > I could safely remove from the Ruby bin dir, though. :-) There > might be some excess there, I mean. > > To test which libraries are loading after building a Ruby version, > I use the simple: > > PS C:\> C:\opt\ruby-1.8.6\bin\ruby.exe -v -rzlib -riconv -ropenssl -e "p 5" > ruby 1.8.6 (2009-01-26 patchlevel 310) [i386-mswin32_90] > 5 > > So no apparent errors there, huh? > > Why am I doing this? I figure this could help with motivating other folks > when they get stuck building Ruby on Windows. :-) Thanks for sharing all your experience on this. One point to take in consideration is that using binaries from gnuwin32 project they link to MSVCRT.dll while your Ruby built with VC9 links to MSVCR90, two different CRT that can really compromise the stability of the interpreter in memory allocation and freeing processes. http://blog.mmediasys.com/2008/01/17/ruby-for-windows-part-1/ And also my other post in the list: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rubyinstaller-devel/2008-January/000230.html > I wish I could make all of that more automatic, but it's tough business. > RubyInstaller recipes for MinGW?: http://github.com/luislavena/rubyinstaller/tree/master > Cheers, > Joao Regards, -- Luis Lavena AREA 17 - Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but rather when there is nothing more to take away. Antoine de Saint-Exup?ry From rogerpack2005 at gmail.com Wed Jan 28 14:51:22 2009 From: rogerpack2005 at gmail.com (Roger Pack) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:51:22 -0700 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] question on bat files Message-ID: <966599840901281151q5acfac81ued88d24e4efdca94@mail.gmail.com> Question: I've noticed currently with gem.bat files [1]: It doesn't play always nicely with windows and different versions of ruby. 1) a contrived example, but if you have a ruby.exe in your path , say c:\ruby_path and run c:\other_ruby\gem.bat from the c:\ directory, it uses c:\ruby_path\ruby.exe to run it 2) you cannot copy gem.bat file anywhere and run it--it must remain where it is [I don't think this limitation on Linux]. Do you think I should report these or are they too obscure to care about? Thanks! -=r [1] example: @ECHO OFF IF NOT "%~f0" == "~f0" GOTO :WinNT @"ruby.exe" "c:/ruby18/bin/gem" %1 %2 %3 %4 %5 %6 %7 %8 %9 GOTO :EOF :WinNT @"ruby.exe" "%~dpn0" %* From rogerpack2005 at gmail.com Wed Jan 28 15:46:28 2009 From: rogerpack2005 at gmail.com (Roger Pack) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:46:28 -0700 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] musings In-Reply-To: <71166b3b0901261300o16ccd9e4uf3dd7e96fa534aab@mail.gmail.com> References: <966599840901211433q1947daa7sb64a01337a11f39d@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901211522n32ad61fcj36cbd3deb5215035@mail.gmail.com> <966599840901241313k26067392y7776e7014dab6c@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901251457y35d142c5n7ab2babd7037d9c0@mail.gmail.com> <966599840901260942p4da55b66n6de00fb72567f7df@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901261300o16ccd9e4uf3dd7e96fa534aab@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <966599840901281246o5a1b11a3n5e85bffce0198055@mail.gmail.com> > Again, no 1.8.7 from the official One-Click side. If you want to shoot > your feet, go ahead and use the recipes :-) Appears from running it versus 1.8.6 that 1.8.7 is a tidge slower. Wonder why. [ruby-benchmark-suite]. -=r From rogerpack2005 at gmail.com Thu Jan 29 19:25:54 2009 From: rogerpack2005 at gmail.com (Roger Pack) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 17:25:54 -0700 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] ... 24 levels... Message-ID: <966599840901291625o247a1a4av30dc93e17a12953f@mail.gmail.com> I wonder if it would be possible to remove this type message ... 24 levels... from backtraces for the rubyinstaller releases--I for one hate them. I'd be happy to provide a patch for it. Thanks! -=r From luislavena at gmail.com Sat Jan 31 07:40:59 2009 From: luislavena at gmail.com (Luis Lavena) Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 10:40:59 -0200 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] question on bat files In-Reply-To: <966599840901281151q5acfac81ued88d24e4efdca94@mail.gmail.com> References: <966599840901281151q5acfac81ued88d24e4efdca94@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <71166b3b0901310440j76615432pdcbe5586a14e3a72@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 5:51 PM, Roger Pack wrote: > Question: > Hey Roger, sorry took me some time to get back to you. > I've noticed currently with gem.bat files [1]: > It doesn't play always nicely with windows and different versions of ruby. Let's see... > 1) a contrived example, but if you have a ruby.exe in your path , say > c:\ruby_path and run c:\other_ruby\gem.bat from the c:\ directory, it > uses c:\ruby_path\ruby.exe to run it Previously the batch files contained the location path of the ruby in usage. That functionality was removed since affected gem installation and future relocation of your Ruby folder. It assumes gem.bat will use "ruby.exe" and look for the ruby-script with the same name of this batch file (dpn0 is used for that). Since the batch and scripts can reside outside ruby bindir, there is no way for us to know if ruby.exe is over there (not without creating lot of batchfile logic). > 2) you cannot copy gem.bat file anywhere and run it--it must remain > where it is [I don't think this limitation on Linux]. Is not, since the gem script in linux contains the shebang that tells you where it should find the ruby interpreter, sometimes is just /bin/env ruby, sometimes is the direct ruby path. For you to use other interpreter with that script need to force the interpreter (ruby19 /path/my/1.8/gem) > Do you think I should report these or are they too obscure to care about? Are too obscure and contains lot cruft that I personally will like to avoid. Being one of those having two interpreters in the path at the same time (with the exact same name). > Thanks! > -=r > > [1] example: > > @ECHO OFF > IF NOT "%~f0" == "~f0" GOTO :WinNT > @"ruby.exe" "c:/ruby18/bin/gem" %1 %2 %3 %4 %5 %6 %7 %8 %9 > GOTO :EOF > :WinNT > @"ruby.exe" "%~dpn0" %* > _______________________________________________ > Rubyinstaller-devel mailing list > Rubyinstaller-devel at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubyinstaller-devel > -- Luis Lavena AREA 17 - Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but rather when there is nothing more to take away. Antoine de Saint-Exup?ry From rogerpack2005 at gmail.com Sat Jan 31 15:05:32 2009 From: rogerpack2005 at gmail.com (Roger Pack) Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 13:05:32 -0700 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] question on bat files In-Reply-To: <71166b3b0901310440j76615432pdcbe5586a14e3a72@mail.gmail.com> References: <966599840901281151q5acfac81ued88d24e4efdca94@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901310440j76615432pdcbe5586a14e3a72@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <966599840901311205x5fbcd27dmcaba4fdb4d0f02f1@mail.gmail.com> > Are too obscure and contains lot cruft that I personally will like to > avoid. Being one of those having two interpreters in the path at the > same time (with the exact same name). So you're saying just leave it be, is that right? The only functionality I'm losing currently is that is c:\ruby18\bin is in the path, I can't run c:\ruby187\bin\gem.bat without taking it out of the path first. I guess you may have a point though--how many people are going to have more than one version of ruby installed and be using both simultaneously? Then again maybe people would do that with 1.8.6 and 1.9, so they can go back and forth between the two, so it could crop up. Thoughts? Thanks! =-r From luislavena at gmail.com Sat Jan 31 15:34:50 2009 From: luislavena at gmail.com (Luis Lavena) Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 18:34:50 -0200 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] question on bat files In-Reply-To: <966599840901311205x5fbcd27dmcaba4fdb4d0f02f1@mail.gmail.com> References: <966599840901281151q5acfac81ued88d24e4efdca94@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901310440j76615432pdcbe5586a14e3a72@mail.gmail.com> <966599840901311205x5fbcd27dmcaba4fdb4d0f02f1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <71166b3b0901311234k31f8b2dcx7ec8be85fb881584@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Roger Pack wrote: >> Are too obscure and contains lot cruft that I personally will like to >> avoid. Being one of those having two interpreters in the path at the >> same time (with the exact same name). > > So you're saying just leave it be, is that right? Kind of? > The only functionality I'm losing currently is that is c:\ruby18\bin > is in the path, I can't run > c:\ruby187\bin\gem.bat > without taking it out of the path first. The problem is not that, the problem is this: Ruby 1.8: C:\Ruby\bin Ruby 1.9: C:\Ruby\bin GEM_PATH=C:\Gems GEM_HOME=C:\Gems PATH=C:\Ruby\bin;%PATH%;C:\Gems\bin So I have installed over there almost all the gems, switch from one ruby to other is just as simple as cleanup the PATH. Cleanup all the PATH from all the installed batch files is more problematic. > I guess you may have a point though--how many people are going to have > more than one version of ruby installed and be using both > simultaneously? I should finish up mrb.exe, is a standalone application that let you alter the path between multiple ruby installations and share the installed gems, It uses some Win32 trickery like Thread Injection, but that's for other post :-P > Then again maybe people would do that with 1.8.6 and 1.9, so they can > go back and forth between the two, so it could crop up. > This issue was raised in mongrel and rubygems mailing list, and this was our solution, there is no easy way to find, without require all the hacking to find where ruby is installed. > Thoughts? > Thanks! I'm sorry that we cannot please everybody, this was our best alternative for this situation, but of course, there are drawbacks. If you find something that work under all these scenarios, I believe RubyGems and RubyInstaller will be the best place to test those :-) Regards, -- Luis Lavena AREA 17 - Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but rather when there is nothing more to take away. Antoine de Saint-Exup?ry From hramrach at centrum.cz Sat Jan 31 15:53:24 2009 From: hramrach at centrum.cz (Michal Suchanek) Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 21:53:24 +0100 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] question on bat files In-Reply-To: <966599840901311205x5fbcd27dmcaba4fdb4d0f02f1@mail.gmail.com> References: <966599840901281151q5acfac81ued88d24e4efdca94@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901310440j76615432pdcbe5586a14e3a72@mail.gmail.com> <966599840901311205x5fbcd27dmcaba4fdb4d0f02f1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 31/01/2009, Roger Pack wrote: > > Are too obscure and contains lot cruft that I personally will like to > > avoid. Being one of those having two interpreters in the path at the > > same time (with the exact same name). > > > So you're saying just leave it be, is that right? > The only functionality I'm losing currently is that is c:\ruby18\bin > is in the path, I can't run > c:\ruby187\bin\gem.bat > without taking it out of the path first. > I guess you may have a point though--how many people are going to have > more than one version of ruby installed and be using both > simultaneously? > Then again maybe people would do that with 1.8.6 and 1.9, so they can > go back and forth between the two, so it could crop up. > People also expect they can move the ruby folder and it will still work, or at least they might. So hardcoding the path may fix one obscure case and break one less obscure one. If you are concerned about running the right ruby do what distributions do - compile with executable suffix. Then you do not have to switch. THe in terpreters are named didfferentlyIf that did not work that would indeed be a problem with ruby. Thanks Michal From rogerpack2005 at gmail.com Sat Jan 31 16:34:53 2009 From: rogerpack2005 at gmail.com (Roger Pack) Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 14:34:53 -0700 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] question on bat files In-Reply-To: References: <966599840901281151q5acfac81ued88d24e4efdca94@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901310440j76615432pdcbe5586a14e3a72@mail.gmail.com> <966599840901311205x5fbcd27dmcaba4fdb4d0f02f1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <966599840901311334m42a28041y8d5407e984727de9@mail.gmail.com> > People also expect they can move the ruby folder and it will still > work, or at least they might. I expected that, but I was under the assumption that if you move ruby's root folder, rbconfig.rb doesn't change so it confuses your paths [?] > If you are concerned about running the right ruby do what > distributions do - compile with executable suffix. Then you do not > have to switch. THe in terpreters are named didfferentlyIf that did > not work that would indeed be a problem with ruby. Yeah that would work. -=r From hramrach at centrum.cz Sat Jan 31 16:53:51 2009 From: hramrach at centrum.cz (Michal Suchanek) Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 22:53:51 +0100 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] question on bat files In-Reply-To: <966599840901311334m42a28041y8d5407e984727de9@mail.gmail.com> References: <966599840901281151q5acfac81ued88d24e4efdca94@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901310440j76615432pdcbe5586a14e3a72@mail.gmail.com> <966599840901311205x5fbcd27dmcaba4fdb4d0f02f1@mail.gmail.com> <966599840901311334m42a28041y8d5407e984727de9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 31/01/2009, Roger Pack wrote: > > People also expect they can move the ruby folder and it will still > > work, or at least they might. > > > I expected that, but I was under the assumption that if you move > ruby's root folder, rbconfig.rb doesn't change so it confuses your > paths [?] > Maybe it does not have a fixed path on Windows? I would have to look at it but it's certainly doable, and moving ruby dirs works for me. Thanks Michal From rogerpack2005 at gmail.com Sat Jan 31 17:16:18 2009 From: rogerpack2005 at gmail.com (Roger Pack) Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 15:16:18 -0700 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] question on bat files In-Reply-To: <71166b3b0901311234k31f8b2dcx7ec8be85fb881584@mail.gmail.com> References: <966599840901281151q5acfac81ued88d24e4efdca94@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901310440j76615432pdcbe5586a14e3a72@mail.gmail.com> <966599840901311205x5fbcd27dmcaba4fdb4d0f02f1@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901311234k31f8b2dcx7ec8be85fb881584@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <966599840901311416t3cd69d65kc1d02aedfefdfc1@mail.gmail.com> > Ruby 1.8: > C:\Ruby\bin > > Ruby 1.9: > C:\Ruby\bin I suppose it is a tricky situation and hard to please everyone. One possibility would be to have rubygems use ~/.gems_ruby_version_number so that there isn't a conflict within the /bin directories [?] -=r From rogerpack2005 at gmail.com Sat Jan 31 19:00:44 2009 From: rogerpack2005 at gmail.com (Roger Pack) Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 17:00:44 -0700 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] question on bat files In-Reply-To: References: <966599840901281151q5acfac81ued88d24e4efdca94@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901310440j76615432pdcbe5586a14e3a72@mail.gmail.com> <966599840901311205x5fbcd27dmcaba4fdb4d0f02f1@mail.gmail.com> <966599840901311334m42a28041y8d5407e984727de9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <966599840901311600k2b335553y3a0630f5e19f1077@mail.gmail.com> oh wow. You are indeed right. For some reason I had run into the problem in years past so thought it was still there but it appears to not be. Not sure It does save the prefix: CONFIG["prefix"] = (TOPDIR || DESTDIR + "") but I'd imagine that doesn't matter. -- unless extensions use that [?] [maybe more important in linux?] Anyway nice to know. -=r On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote: > On 31/01/2009, Roger Pack wrote: >> > People also expect they can move the ruby folder and it will still >> > work, or at least they might. >> >> >> I expected that, but I was under the assumption that if you move >> ruby's root folder, rbconfig.rb doesn't change so it confuses your >> paths [?] >> > > Maybe it does not have a fixed path on Windows? > > I would have to look at it but it's certainly doable, and moving ruby > dirs works for me. > > Thanks > > Michal > _______________________________________________ > Rubyinstaller-devel mailing list > Rubyinstaller-devel at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubyinstaller-devel > -- I wonder if the phrase "meeting my needs in the relationship" has a hint of selfishness... From will at hotgazpacho.org Sat Jan 31 19:10:35 2009 From: will at hotgazpacho.org (Will Green) Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 19:10:35 -0500 Subject: [Rubyinstaller-devel] question on bat files In-Reply-To: <966599840901311205x5fbcd27dmcaba4fdb4d0f02f1@mail.gmail.com> References: <966599840901281151q5acfac81ued88d24e4efdca94@mail.gmail.com> <71166b3b0901310440j76615432pdcbe5586a14e3a72@mail.gmail.com> <966599840901311205x5fbcd27dmcaba4fdb4d0f02f1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7C5AE571-7D97-46B3-94B9-722E208452BF@hotgazpacho.org> FWIW, MS Visual Studio installs a bunch of CLI tools, but does not add them to your path. Instead, they provide cmd/bat files that set a bunch of environment variables and mess with the path before dumping you to a command prompt. That way, you get a little sandbox; the env vars and path alterations apply only to that command session. You might want to look at that approach; one cmd file to launch 1.8.6, one for 1.8.7, etc. Sent from my iPod On Jan 31, 2009, at 3:05 PM, Roger Pack wrote: >> Are too obscure and contains lot cruft that I personally will like to >> avoid. Being one of those having two interpreters in the path at the >> same time (with the exact same name). > > So you're saying just leave it be, is that right? > The only functionality I'm losing currently is that is c:\ruby18\bin > is in the path, I can't run > c:\ruby187\bin\gem.bat > without taking it out of the path first. > I guess you may have a point though--how many people are going to have > more than one version of ruby installed and be using both > simultaneously? > Then again maybe people would do that with 1.8.6 and 1.9, so they can > go back and forth between the two, so it could crop up. > > Thoughts? > Thanks! > > =-r > _______________________________________________ > Rubyinstaller-devel mailing list > Rubyinstaller-devel at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubyinstaller-devel >