What about doing something along the lines of Strawberry Perl, i.e.
bundle a compiler with the distro?
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.
···
-----Original Message-----
From: Curt Hibbs [mailto:ml.chibbs@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 10:19 PM
To: ruby-talk ML
Subject: Re: [ANN] One-Click Ruby Installer for Windows
1.8.5-21 released
On 8/29/06, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky <znmeb@cesmail.net> wrote:
> >
> Speaking of which, I just installed Visual C++ Express on the gizmo
> that 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.
Do you think you are allowed to distribute MS compiler (and the other
tools needed)? (cause I don't think so).
./alex
···
On 8/30/06, Berger, Daniel <Daniel.Berger@qwest.com> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Curt Hibbs [mailto:ml.chibbs@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 10:19 PM
> To: ruby-talk ML
> Subject: Re: [ANN] One-Click Ruby Installer for Windows
> 1.8.5-21 released
>
> On 8/29/06, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky <znmeb@cesmail.net> wrote:
> > >
> > Speaking of which, I just installed Visual C++ Express on the gizmo
> > that 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
What about doing something along the lines of Strawberry Perl, i.e.
bundle a compiler with the distro?
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.
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 ...
-John
···
On 8/30/06, Curt Hibbs <ml.chibbs@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/30/06, Berger, Daniel <Daniel.Berger@qwest.com> wrote:
>
> What about doing something along the lines of Strawberry Perl, i.e.
> bundle a compiler with the distro?
>
> Perl Download - www.perl.org
>
> Regards,
>
> Dan
That's a very interesting idea. It would really provide a standard
environment for building ruby extensions.
No, you can't redistribute MS tools. This would only be a possibility
is we go the MinGW route.
Curt
···
On 8/30/06, Alexandru Popescu <the.mindstorm.mailinglist@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/30/06, Berger, Daniel <Daniel.Berger@qwest.com> wrote:
>
> What about doing something along the lines of Strawberry Perl, i.e.
> bundle a compiler with the distro?
>
> Perl Download - www.perl.org
>
> Regards,
>
> Dan
>
Do you think you are allowed to distribute MS compiler (and the other
tools needed)? (cause I don't think so).
That's a very interesting idea. It would really provide a standard
environment for building ruby extensions.
Curt
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.
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
···
On 8/30/06, John Lam <drjflam@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.
On 8/30/06, Curt Hibbs <ml.chibbs@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/30/06, Berger, Daniel <Daniel.Berger@qwest.com> wrote:
> >
> > What about doing something along the lines of Strawberry Perl, i.e.
> > bundle a compiler with the distro?
> >
> > Perl Download - www.perl.org
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Dan
>
> That's a very interesting idea. It would really provide a standard
> environment for building ruby extensions.
>
> Curt
>
I wouldn't even have thought it to be possible, but it can't hurt to ask.
Curt
···
On 8/30/06, John Lam <drjflam@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.
On 8/30/06, Curt Hibbs <ml.chibbs@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/30/06, Berger, Daniel <Daniel.Berger@qwest.com> wrote:
> >
> > What about doing something along the lines of Strawberry Perl, i.e.
> > bundle a compiler with the distro?
> >
> > Perl Download - www.perl.org
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Dan
>
> That's a very interesting idea. It would really provide a standard
> environment for building ruby extensions.
>
> Curt
>
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?
./alex
···
On 8/30/06, Curt Hibbs <ml.chibbs@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/30/06, Alexandru Popescu <the.mindstorm.mailinglist@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/30/06, Berger, Daniel <Daniel.Berger@qwest.com> wrote:
> >
> > What about doing something along the lines of Strawberry Perl, i.e.
> > bundle a compiler with the distro?
> >
> > Perl Download - www.perl.org
> >
> > 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.
I think there are/there have been attempts to do this (cygwin,
unixtools) but I wouldn't walk this way.
./alex
···
On 8/31/06, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky <znmeb@cesmail.net> wrote:
Curt Hibbs wrote:
> On 8/30/06, Berger, Daniel <Daniel.Berger@qwest.com> wrote:
>>
>> What about doing something along the lines of Strawberry Perl, i.e.
>> bundle a compiler with the distro?
>>
>> Perl Download - www.perl.org
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Dan
>
> That's a very interesting idea. It would really provide a standard
> environment for building ruby extensions.
>
> Curt
>
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
···
On 8/30/06, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky <znmeb@cesmail.net> wrote:
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.
I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard to come up with a list if we get the go-ahead.
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.
-John
···
On 8/30/06, Alexandru Popescu <the.mindstorm.mailinglist@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/30/06, John Lam <drjflam@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
--
:Architect of InfoQ.com:
.w( the_mindstorm )p.
> -John
> http://www.iunknown.com
>
> On 8/30/06, Curt Hibbs <ml.chibbs@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 8/30/06, Berger, Daniel <Daniel.Berger@qwest.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > What about doing something along the lines of Strawberry Perl, i.e.
> > > bundle a compiler with the distro?
> > >
> > > Perl Download - www.perl.org
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Dan
> >
> > That's a very interesting idea. It would really provide a standard
> > environment for building ruby extensions.
> >
> > Curt
> >
>
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.
-austin
···
On 8/30/06, Alexandru Popescu <the.mindstorm.mailinglist@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?
> 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
···
On 8/31/06, Austin Ziegler <halostatue@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/30/06, Alexandru Popescu <the.mindstorm.mailinglist@gmail.com> wrote:
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.
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).
-austin
···
On 8/30/06, Alexandru Popescu <the.mindstorm.mailinglist@gmail.com> wrote:
Austin do you know if MinGW is at least planning to support this or is
it a dead-end?
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
···
On 8/31/06, mortench <mortench@gmail.com> wrote:
Austin Ziegler skrev:
> 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.
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.
-austin
···
On 8/30/06, Alexandru Popescu <the.mindstorm.mailinglist@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 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...
