I've taken the liberty to submit a new RubyForge project: The Ruby Widnows Distribution.
Why?
Because there is no easy installable "plain" Ruby package for Windows.
While it is similar to the Ruby One Click Installer, it differs widely in scope: It will only include RubyGems (for now), to provide a "clean slate" Ruby distribution.
I don't really need the One-Click Installer anymore, and while it provides a great starting point and all in one package, it provides more stuff than I need, I think that others are in a similar position.
Also, the Ruby distribution on garbagecollect[0] is missing some (two, actually) DLLs to work out of the box. This project intends to fix that problem, while providing the ease of use of the One Click Installer (registering extensions, PATH, etc.).
I hope to be able to commit the NSIS installer script and Rakefile to build the installer ASAP, together with a usable web presence for the project.
So presumably that includes zlib in order for rubygems to work, but would you mind explaining the meaning minimal, or more particularly, can you tell us which extensions you include in the release at what versions? Presumably, you're working off of VC 6?
···
On 12 Mar 2008, at 00:53, Phillip Gawlowski wrote:
While it is similar to the Ruby One Click Installer, it differs widely in scope: It will only include RubyGems (for now), to provide a "clean slate" Ruby distribution.
While it is similar to the Ruby One Click Installer, it differs widely in scope: It will only include RubyGems (for now), to provide a "clean slate" Ruby distribution.
So presumably that includes zlib in order for rubygems to work, but would you mind explaining the meaning minimal, or more particularly, can you tell us which extensions you include in the release at what versions? Presumably, you're working off of VC 6?
Only Rubygems at its current release version.
The package will include zlib, and readlines support.
And while I'd love to compile Ruby, it's impossible for me to obtain a VC6 compiler, so I'll simply grab the Ruby binary off of garbagecollect.jp (same source as the One Click Installer), add the needed support, and that's it, more or less.
To sum up:
- Current Ruby release (I'll probably create a Ruby 1.9 package, too)
- Current Rubygems
- zlib, readlines
- An easy to use installer package (file associations, .inputrc for European users, etc.)
It's possible that it'll include RCov, rake, and/or similar packages used for development, but not in the first release.
I am, however, open to suggestions as which gems / libraries should be included in the future.
- Phillip Gawlowski
···
On 12 Mar 2008, at 00:53, Phillip Gawlowski wrote:
Since my reply seems to have been swallowed, the second try:
James Tucker wrote:
While it is similar to the Ruby One Click Installer, it differs widely in scope: It will only include RubyGems (for now), to provide a "clean slate" Ruby distribution.
So presumably that includes zlib in order for rubygems to work, but would you mind explaining the meaning minimal, or more particularly, can you tell us which extensions you include in the release at what versions? Presumably, you're working off of VC 6?
Only Rubygems at its current release version.
The package will include zlib, and readlines support.
And while I'd love to compile Ruby, it's impossible for me to obtain a
VC6 compiler, so I'll simply grab the Ruby binary off of
garbagecollect.jp (same source as the One Click Installer), add the
needed support, and that's it, more or less.
To sum up:
- Current Ruby release (I'll probably create a Ruby 1.9 package, too)
- Current Rubygems
- zlib, readlines
- An easy to use installer package (file associations, .inputrc for
European users, etc.)
It's possible that it'll include RCov, rake, and/or similar packages
used for development, but not in the first release.
I am, however, open to suggestions as which gems / libraries should be
included in the future.
- Phillip Gawlowski
···
On 12 Mar 2008, at 00:53, Phillip Gawlowski wrote:
Sounds like it might be useful for those that want a "smaller install"
(I would be one).
You might want to consider joining the Ruby OCI (One Click Installer)
mailing list and bouncing your ideas off them.
If you were able to add your package as an "option" next to the typical
OCI it would get WAY more publicity. I know I would probably download
it.
A couple of thoughts:
What about gettext and openssl packages? Those are...vaguely useful.
And iconv?
You might be able to get a far smaller download if you don't include the
Rdoc stuff, maybe some other stuff.
And while I'd love to compile Ruby, it's impossible for me to obtain a
VC6 compiler, so I'll simply grab the Ruby binary off of
garbagecollect.jp (same source as the One Click Installer), add the
needed support, and that's it, more or less.
If you wanted to live the edge you could compile it with mingw
If you try hard I'm sure you can find a VC6 compiler around.
While it is similar to the Ruby One Click Installer, it differs widely in scope: It will only include RubyGems (for now), to provide a "clean slate" Ruby distribution.
So presumably that includes zlib in order for rubygems to work, but would you mind explaining the meaning minimal, or more particularly, can you tell us which extensions you include in the release at what versions? Presumably, you're working off of VC 6?
Only Rubygems at its current release version.
The package will include zlib, and readlines support.
So no openssl
And while I'd love to compile Ruby, it's impossible for me to obtain a VC6 compiler, so I'll simply grab the Ruby binary off of garbagecollect.jp (same source as the One Click Installer), add the needed support, and that's it, more or less.
We managed to pick a copy up off of Amazon less than six months ago. Take a look
···
On 13 Mar 2008, at 18:19, Phillip Gawlowski wrote:
On 12 Mar 2008, at 00:53, Phillip Gawlowski wrote:
To sum up:
- Current Ruby release (I'll probably create a Ruby 1.9 package, too)
- Current Rubygems
- zlib, readlines
- An easy to use installer package (file associations, .inputrc for European users, etc.)
It's possible that it'll include RCov, rake, and/or similar packages used for development, but not in the first release.
Sounds like it might be useful for those that want a "smaller install" (I would be one).
You might want to consider joining the Ruby OCI (One Click Installer) mailing list and bouncing your ideas off them.
Good point. And one which I didn't consider. D'oh.
If you were able to add your package as an "option" next to the typical OCI it would get WAY more publicity. I know I would probably download it.
It'd help, anyway.
A couple of thoughts:
What about gettext and openssl packages? Those are...vaguely useful. And iconv?
I'll have to look into that, and see if they are included with the Ruby binary or not.
You might be able to get a far smaller download if you don't include the Rdoc stuff, maybe some other stuff.
Well, Ruby (just the binaries) weighs in at roughly 10 MB, and the documentation is well compressed (it being text and all ;).
I was thinking about slimming Ruby down, though.
And while I'd love to compile Ruby, it's impossible for me to obtain a
VC6 compiler, so I'll simply grab the Ruby binary off of
garbagecollect.jp (same source as the One Click Installer), add the
needed support, and that's it, more or less.
If you wanted to live the edge you could compile it with mingw
That's a good idea, and I actually do have a MSYS/MinGW toolchain on this computer..
If you try hard I'm sure you can find a VC6 compiler around.
At least not on MS's website (well, I could downgrade if I would shell out for a recent VS2005/8 version, but I'm unwilling to do so..)
Oh oh. (Hand.) A suggestion for doing minimal iconv: use the tml's
iconv lib, which is much smaller on Windows than the normal iconv.
I discovered these while trying to slim down the Shoes distro for
Windows.
<http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/gnome/binaries/win32/dependencies/>
The package is at the bottom (win_iconv_dll-tml) and it is basically
the iconv API backed by the unicode support native to Windows.
_why
···
On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 02:12:38AM +0900, Roger Pack wrote:
What about gettext and openssl packages? Those are...vaguely useful.
And iconv?
The package will include zlib, and readlines support.
So no openssl
Oh, it'll include that, too (in fact, all dependencies. I'll just have to identify them :/).
We managed to pick a copy up off of Amazon less than six months ago. Take a look
Yeah, the price tag is a bit too high for me.
(IMHO, it might be a great idea to switch to a more recent version of Visual C all together, considering that the Express Edition is free, and can produce non-/NET code, but that's just my opinion).
That's a good idea, and I actually do have a MSYS/MinGW toolchain on
this computer..
Yeah it works and produces (in my opinion) a better ruby...it's just so
edgy that peoples' gems don't use it right :_
right way is
=~ /mswin32|mingw/
so it doesn't work natively with everything
I wonder if you could just rename RUBY_PLATFORM to be mswin32_mingw or
something and then live happy
Take care.
-R
On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 02:12:38AM +0900, Roger Pack wrote:
What about gettext and openssl packages? Those are...vaguely useful. And iconv?
Oh oh. (Hand.) A suggestion for doing minimal iconv: use the tml's iconv lib, which is much smaller on Windows than the normal iconv.
I discovered these while trying to slim down the Shoes distro for
Windows.
<http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/gnome/binaries/win32/dependencies/>
The package is at the bottom (win_iconv_dll-tml) and it is basically
the iconv API backed by the unicode support native to Windows.
On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 02:12:38AM +0900, Roger Pack wrote:
What about gettext and openssl packages? Those are...vaguely useful.
And iconv?
Oh oh. (Hand.) A suggestion for doing minimal iconv: use the tml's
iconv lib, which is much smaller on Windows than the normal iconv.
I discovered these while trying to slim down the Shoes distro for
Windows.
<http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/gnome/binaries/win32/dependencies/>
The package is at the bottom (win_iconv_dll-tml) and it is basically
the iconv API backed by the unicode support native to Windows.
There were many discussions whether One click should use VC6/VC8/mingw
- search the archives.
Now they seem to be investigating the mingw path.
It's relatively easy to build ruby with VC8. One problem is to compile
the extensions (openssl and zlib are mentioned
as hard to compile without autoconf&co, IIRC). Second problem (should
be more or less solved) are binary gems - gems
built for one compiler don't work with ruby built by a different compiler.
BTW, I second to Roger's suggestion: it would be better use of
resources if you join the OCI team. I'd say the majority
of the problems are common to both of you (=compiling the extensions,
compiler decision). Once this is solved, it should be easy
(well... to add/remove some stuff and use another installer.
···
On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 6:12 PM, Phillip Gawlowski <cmdjackryan@googlemail.com> wrote:
(IMHO, it might be a great idea to switch to a more recent version of
Visual C all together, considering that the Express Edition is free, and
can produce non-/NET code, but that's just my opinion).
Jumping late on this thread (been away in vacation trip).
Switching to VC8/VC9 or even VC7 requires recompilation of
dependencies to use the same CRT DLL. Search the list for posts about
this.
Been raised before, tried several times, and is impossible to
accomplish without loosing your brain in the process.
I think I will move the MinGW+MSYS building process one step further
and use the better Windows alternatives than traditional dependencies
(like win_iconv that _why commented previously).
Regarding NSIS, I'll prefer move to MSI (Microsoft Installer) to
provide patches instead of full releases in the future.
Regards,
···
On Mar 16, 2:12 pm, Phillip Gawlowski <cmdjackr...@googlemail.com> wrote:
(IMHO, it might be a great idea to switch to a more recent version of
Visual C all together, considering that the Express Edition is free, and
can produce non-/NET code, but that's just my opinion).
That's a good idea, and I actually do have a MSYS/MinGW toolchain on
this computer..
Yeah it works and produces (in my opinion) a better ruby...it's just so edgy that peoples' gems don't use it right :_
right way is
=~ /mswin32|mingw/
so it doesn't work natively with everything
I wonder if you could just rename RUBY_PLATFORM to be mswin32_mingw or something and then live happy
Take care.
-R
Hm, I'll have to look deeper into GCC than I'd like to find out if that works.
Theoretically, since my GCC install links against msvcrt.dll, extensions should still work.
I haven't yet tried to build Ruby myself, however.
Well, I wasn't planning on doing anything on Sunday, anyway.
To be honest i think it would be better if all those smart Windows guys
come together and also work together.
If there are problems that cant be solved, it would be nice if we here
could somehow help out.
Here is my reasons (it is personal):
I develop/write on Linux. Although I have a few problems with Linux
in some areas, in general Linux is a MUCH better plattform than
Windows as far as I am concerned. Writing ruby is quite easy so
my ruby stuff runs on Windows too (sometimes adapting a few things,
but in general this is a true statement).
Now, when I work with windows, I would like to have the option to
install pretty everything that I want to have on windows (which
normally is a lot). It would be great if I could fine-tune
the install. Also the download size for me does not really matter,
if its 50 mb, 100 mb, 150 mb... about a year ago i bought a 4
gig usb stick, very small, for 31 Euros. I think this is quite
cheap to not really care about the mb size anymore, so features
can go in easily as far as I am concerned
(My personal ruby files are measuring a total of 17 MB files so this
is also not much)
"I don't really need the One-Click Installer anymore, and while it
provides a great starting point and all in one package, it provides more
stuff than I need, I think that others are in a similar position."
I really think the one click installer should be made more modular in
this case. It seems that the windows people are generally unhappy about
various things with Windows, and I understand all the frustration, but
for me
being a lazy windows-user it would be really better if they all get
together and design a compromise which everyone can accept
That would be great. Both because of the possibility to make patches
and the better MS integration.
Thanks
Michal
···
On 18/03/2008, Luis Lavena <luislavena@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mar 16, 2:12 pm, Phillip Gawlowski <cmdjackr...@googlemail.com> > wrote:
> (IMHO, it might be a great idea to switch to a more recent version of
> Visual C all together, considering that the Express Edition is free, and
> can produce non-/NET code, but that's just my opinion).
>
Jumping late on this thread (been away in vacation trip).
Switching to VC8/VC9 or even VC7 requires recompilation of
dependencies to use the same CRT DLL. Search the list for posts about
this.
Been raised before, tried several times, and is impossible to
accomplish without loosing your brain in the process.
I think I will move the MinGW+MSYS building process one step further
and use the better Windows alternatives than traditional dependencies
(like win_iconv that _why commented previously).
As Mailman does not like my email address ( I don't know why but
Mailmen refuse to communicate with me at all) I will send the results
of trying to use the install3 zip archive here.
- there is no script for running the rake task(s), and it might not be
obvious how to run them for people who are not familiar with rake yet.
- there is no default rake action, and one has to look into the
recipes to find out what are the available actions (download, unpack,
configure, compile, install)
- rake aborts download action due to execution timeout - probably
depends on download speed
- bsdtar requires zlib1.dll which is not downloaded. This is not
normally present in the system although it might be present if you put
your ruby installation into PATH.
-there is some sort of error with directories. It appears the scripts
fail to create sandbox/ruby_build, and running configure fails because
the configure script is not found although it appears to be present.
Thanks
Michal
···
On 18/03/2008, Luis Lavena <luislavena@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mar 16, 2:12 pm, Phillip Gawlowski <cmdjackr...@googlemail.com> > wrote:
> (IMHO, it might be a great idea to switch to a more recent version of
> Visual C all together, considering that the Express Edition is free, and
> can produce non-/NET code, but that's just my opinion).
>
Jumping late on this thread (been away in vacation trip).
Switching to VC8/VC9 or even VC7 requires recompilation of
dependencies to use the same CRT DLL. Search the list for posts about
this.
Been raised before, tried several times, and is impossible to
accomplish without loosing your brain in the process.
I think I will move the MinGW+MSYS building process one step further
and use the better Windows alternatives than traditional dependencies
(like win_iconv that _why commented previously).
has some links to an "almost auto" mingw download+compile (basically
it's reduced to a rake task). I'm not sure if he has all the
dependencies linked in, but I think he does.
That would be far better than the painful experience I experienced
getting all the dependencies installed.
to add/remove some stuff and use another installer.
