Does anybody have a kind of "step by step" instructions on how to
compile Ruby on Windows? (I don't need the one click installer). I have
VC+ 2003 toolkit and .net 1.1 sdk but I'm not really sure how to get the
.exe release out of the source. I've read the other threads but none of
them really explain how to complile it.
Thank you in advance. AlphaBeta
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
I've been down this path but had a few problems and gave up.
Basically I could do it with Visual Studio 6 but failed with vc2003. My
main problem after this though was that while I got it to compile under VS6,
I then couldn't use RUDL (separate package) because it complained about
"require__" when I tried to start my app.
It does kind of back up one of my issues which I've raised before, that
Windows (which so many people use) doesn't have an "official" release for
Windows, and we are dependant on Curt's (very fine) work to provide the
one-click-installer. Which quite understandably he does in his spare time.
A proper, official, supported "how-to" with the correct build-environment
configs, versions of tools (MAKE, LIB etc.) and so on would be great. That
way we could at least all be "singing from the same sheet".
Glenn
(wearing a flameproof suit!)
On 15/03/06, AlphaBeta <idontwantspam@idontlikespam.com> wrote:
Does anybody have a kind of "step by step" instructions on how to
compile Ruby on Windows? (I don't need the one click installer). I have
VC+ 2003 toolkit and .net 1.1 sdk but I'm not really sure how to get the
.exe release out of the source. I've read the other threads but none of
them really explain how to complile it.Thank you in advance. AlphaBeta
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.
--
All the best
Glenn
Aylesbury, UK
Glenn Smith schrieb:
A proper, official, supported "how-to" with the correct build-environment
configs, versions of tools (MAKE, LIB etc.) and so on would be great. That
way we could at least all be "singing from the same sheet".
+1 But I suggest a ruby-dev list in english, as my japanese is very poor 
The summaries are fine but they don't provide any further help. If I had an english discussion list, I properbly able to collect the information I need. So the chance that someone writes a tutorial or HOWTO will increase.
g,
--
Daniel Völkerts
Protected by Anti Pesto.
Glenn Smith schrieb:
> A proper, official, supported "how-to" with the correct build-environment
> configs, versions of tools (MAKE, LIB etc.) and so on would be great. That
> way we could at least all be "singing from the same sheet".+1 But I suggest a ruby-dev list in english, as my japanese is very poor
had an english discussion list, I properbly able to collect the
information I need. So the chance that someone writes a tutorial or
HOWTO will increase.
Download and install the following:
1. Visual C++ Toolkit 2003 (free)
2. MS Platform SDK 2003 (free. Uncheck everything but the "Core"
entry. You want everything under Core, even if you don't have a 64bit
machine. Some of the important tools are only part of the 64bit
section.)
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=A55B6B43-E24F-4EA3-A93E-40C0EC4F68E5&displaylang=en
3. MS .NET Framework 1.1 (a prerequisite for #4)
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=262d25e3-f589-4842-8157-034d1e7cf3a3&displaylang=en
4. MS .NET SDK 1.1 (not 2.0.)
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=9b3a2ca6-3647-4070-9f41-a333c6b9181d&displaylang=en
Once you've downloaded and installed these, you'll need to configure
your environment variables. Here's what my vcvars32.bat file looks
like: (Sorry about the line breaks. You'll need to remove those.)
@echo off
Set PATH=C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual C++ Toolkit
2003\bin;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Platform SDK\Bin;C:\Program
Files\Microsoft Platform SDK\Bin\win64\x86\AMD64;%PATH%
Set INCLUDE=C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual C++ Toolkit
2003\include;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Platform
SDK\Include;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio .NET
2003\Vc7\include;%INCLUDE%
Set LIB=C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual C++ Toolkit
2003\lib;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Platform SDK\Lib;C:\Program
Files\Microsoft Visual Studio .NET 2003\Vc7\lib;%LIB%
Those should be the default installation folders for the Microsoft
tools, but if you put them elsewhere, simply modify the batch file to
suit. Note that you need the AMD64 tools in your path even if you
have a 32bit machine. For some crazy reason, that's where Microsoft
put some of the important tools.
Download the latest Ruby release from:
http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/20020102.html
You can either get the 1.8.4 release, or the 'stable snapshot', which
includes fixes since the last release. The first time you try to get
this working, I recommend the regular release.
Uncompress the download into a folder that doesn't have any spaces in the name.
For the purposes of this howto, let's say that's c:\ruby-src\
If I explained myself clearly, you will now have a folder called
c:\ruby-src\ruby-1.8.4\, with various things under it, including
c:\ruby-src\ruby-1.8.4\win32\
If you download a different release than 1.8.4, that folder name might
be different.
To avoid cluttering up this directory with temporary files, we'll do
the actual build elsewhere.
Make a folder called c:\ruby-src\build\
Open a command prompt by clicking a shortcut, or typing "cmd" into the
Start -> Run prompt.
Run the "vcvars32.bat" file you made earlier, which will add the
Microsoft tools to your environment. This means, by the way, that it
should be somewhere in your default PATH.
==== SCARY HACK SECTION ====
The Microsoft tools previously included a pair of utilities, "lib" and
"dumpbin", which acted as front-ends for the "link.exe" command.
Luckily, the 64bit directory in the Platform SDK includes "lib.exe",
but we still need to deal with dumpbin.exe. Sadly, none of the free
downloads seem to include it.
Ruby 1.9/2.0 shouldn't have this problem, and you can skip this step
if you have the full Visual Studio 2003.
Go to c:\ruby-src\ruby-1.8.4\win32\, and edit the following file:
mkexports.rb
On line 6, change the command inside the double-quotes of IO.foreach.
change: "|dumpbin -symbols "
Don't forget the space at the end.
==== END SCARY HACK ====
Change your current directory to c:\ruby-src\build\
Run the following commands, in order:
c:\ruby-src\ruby-1.8.4\win32\configure.bat (yes, you need to refer to
it by its full path.)
nmake
nmake test
nmake DESTDIR=c:/ruby install
The final command allows you to specify where you actually want Ruby
to be installed.
Note the forward slash instead of backslash.
There are more examples in the README.win32 file, found in the
c:\ruby-src\ruby-1.8.4\win32\ folder.
So simple, even a child could operate it!
On 3/15/06, Daniel Völkerts <daniel@voelkerts.de> wrote:
to: "|link /dump /symbols "
Blimey!
And on Linux? ./configure; make; sudo make install
:o)
I accept that you know what you are talking about Wilson, but surely there
is a much easier way? And bear in mind that what we are wanting to achieve
here is a compile-on-windows FAQ that is standard so that all of the various
ruby libraries will also work.
Is there no single-downloadable compiler that will compile, link and install
(ie. provider compiler, linker and make tool) that will provide good
executables with reasonable performance and minimal hassle?
Glenn
On 15/03/06, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/15/06, Daniel Völkerts <daniel@voelkerts.de> wrote:
> Glenn Smith schrieb:
>
> > A proper, official, supported "how-to" with the correct
build-environment
> > configs, versions of tools (MAKE, LIB etc.) and so on would be
great. That
> > way we could at least all be "singing from the same sheet".
>
> +1 But I suggest a ruby-dev list in english, as my japanese is very poor
>
> had an english discussion list, I properbly able to collect the
> information I need. So the chance that someone writes a tutorial or
> HOWTO will increase.
>Download and install the following:
1. Visual C++ Toolkit 2003 (free)
http://msdn.microsoft.com/visualc/vctoolkit2003/2. MS Platform SDK 2003 (free. Uncheck everything but the "Core"
entry. You want everything under Core, even if you don't have a 64bit
machine. Some of the important tools are only part of the 64bit
section.)3. MS .NET Framework 1.1 (a prerequisite for #4)
4. MS .NET SDK 1.1 (not 2.0.)
Once you've downloaded and installed these, you'll need to configure
your environment variables. Here's what my vcvars32.bat file looks
like: (Sorry about the line breaks. You'll need to remove those.)@echo off
Set PATH=C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual C++ Toolkit
2003\bin;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Platform SDK\Bin;C:\Program
Files\Microsoft Platform SDK\Bin\win64\x86\AMD64;%PATH%
Set INCLUDE=C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual C++ Toolkit
2003\include;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Platform
SDK\Include;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio .NET
2003\Vc7\include;%INCLUDE%
Set LIB=C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual C++ Toolkit
2003\lib;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Platform SDK\Lib;C:\Program
Files\Microsoft Visual Studio .NET 2003\Vc7\lib;%LIB%Those should be the default installation folders for the Microsoft
tools, but if you put them elsewhere, simply modify the batch file to
suit. Note that you need the AMD64 tools in your path even if you
have a 32bit machine. For some crazy reason, that's where Microsoft
put some of the important tools.Download the latest Ruby release from:
http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/20020102.html
You can either get the 1.8.4 release, or the 'stable snapshot', which
includes fixes since the last release. The first time you try to get
this working, I recommend the regular release.Uncompress the download into a folder that doesn't have any spaces in the
name.
For the purposes of this howto, let's say that's c:\ruby-src\
If I explained myself clearly, you will now have a folder called
c:\ruby-src\ruby-1.8.4\, with various things under it, including
c:\ruby-src\ruby-1.8.4\win32\
If you download a different release than 1.8.4, that folder name might
be different.To avoid cluttering up this directory with temporary files, we'll do
the actual build elsewhere.
Make a folder called c:\ruby-src\build\Open a command prompt by clicking a shortcut, or typing "cmd" into the
Start -> Run prompt.
Run the "vcvars32.bat" file you made earlier, which will add the
Microsoft tools to your environment. This means, by the way, that it
should be somewhere in your default PATH.==== SCARY HACK SECTION ====
The Microsoft tools previously included a pair of utilities, "lib" and
"dumpbin", which acted as front-ends for the "link.exe" command.
Luckily, the 64bit directory in the Platform SDK includes "lib.exe",
but we still need to deal with dumpbin.exe. Sadly, none of the free
downloads seem to include it.
Ruby 1.9/2.0 shouldn't have this problem, and you can skip this step
if you have the full Visual Studio 2003.Go to c:\ruby-src\ruby-1.8.4\win32\, and edit the following file:
mkexports.rb
On line 6, change the command inside the double-quotes of IO.foreach.
change: "|dumpbin -symbols "
to: "|link /dump /symbols "
Don't forget the space at the end.
==== END SCARY HACK ====Change your current directory to c:\ruby-src\build\
Run the following commands, in order:
c:\ruby-src\ruby-1.8.4\win32\configure.bat (yes, you need to refer to
it by its full path.)
nmake
nmake test
nmake DESTDIR=c:/ruby install
The final command allows you to specify where you actually want Ruby
to be installed.
Note the forward slash instead of backslash.
There are more examples in the README.win32 file, found in the
c:\ruby-src\ruby-1.8.4\win32\ folder.So simple, even a child could operate it!
--
All the best
Glenn
Aylesbury, UK
Wilson Bilkovich schrieb:
So simple, even a child could operate it!
*g* Thanks for that, I'll give it a try.
--
Daniel Völkerts
Protected by Anti Pesto.
No. Of the choices, MSYS/MINGW is going to work most like Unix. MSVC6
is no longer available for legal download. But...
VS.NET (2002 & 2003) & VS (2005) use a later MSVC runtime DLL (7, 7.1,
and 8.0) that are different than the MSVC6 runtime DLL. The MSVC8 DLL
is significantly different even than VS.NET (7, 7.1).
I am also working, in fits and starts, on compile instructions for cl
14 (VS 2005) with the currently-free Express version. This will be
something that ultimately can go through the entire Ruby build process
and build something like the one-click installer for you.
-austin
On 3/15/06, Glenn Smith <glenn.ruby@gmail.com> wrote:
Is there no single-downloadable compiler that will compile, link and install
(ie. provider compiler, linker and make tool) that will provide good
executables with reasonable performance and minimal hassle?
--
Austin Ziegler * halostatue@gmail.com
* Alternate: austin@halostatue.ca
I know you were kidding, but I felt like sending an e-mail, so..
A more fair comparison would be a set of Ruby build instructions for a
Linux distro that didn't ship with a package manager or a copy of GCC.
Highly nontrivial.
That being said, Windows is a crazy pain in the rear. If someone with
more build experience (like Austin) can shave some steps out of my
writeup, I'd be happy to learn something new. It would be nice if the
platform SDK license didn't prevent redistribution. Then someone
could make a self-contained build process for Ruby on win32.
Luckily, the mswin32 distribution of Ruby is kept up to date, and most
people never have a real need to build their own.
On 3/15/06, Glenn Smith <glenn.ruby@gmail.com> wrote:
Blimey!
And on Linux? ./configure; make; sudo make install
:o)
I accept that you know what you are talking about Wilson, but surely there
is a much easier way? And bear in mind that what we are wanting to achieve
here is a compile-on-windows FAQ that is standard so that all of the various
ruby libraries will also work.Is there no single-downloadable compiler that will compile, link and install
(ie. provider compiler, linker and make tool) that will provide good
executables with reasonable performance and minimal hassle?On 15/03/06, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 3/15/06, Daniel Völkerts <daniel@voelkerts.de> wrote:
> > Glenn Smith schrieb:
> >
> > > A proper, official, supported "how-to" with the correct
> build-environment
> > > configs, versions of tools (MAKE, LIB etc.) and so on would be
> great. That
> > > way we could at least all be "singing from the same sheet".
> >
> > +1 But I suggest a ruby-dev list in english, as my japanese is very poor
> >
> > had an english discussion list, I properbly able to collect the
> > information I need. So the chance that someone writes a tutorial or
> > HOWTO will increase.
> >
>
> Download and install the following:
> 1. Visual C++ Toolkit 2003 (free)
> Microsoft Learn: Build skills that open doors in your career
>
> 2. MS Platform SDK 2003 (free. Uncheck everything but the "Core"
> entry. You want everything under Core, even if you don't have a 64bit
> machine. Some of the important tools are only part of the 64bit
> section.)
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=A55B6B43-E24F-4EA3-A93E-40C0EC4F68E5&displaylang=en
>
> 3. MS .NET Framework 1.1 (a prerequisite for #4)
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=262d25e3-f589-4842-8157-034d1e7cf3a3&displaylang=en
>
> 4. MS .NET SDK 1.1 (not 2.0.)
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=9b3a2ca6-3647-4070-9f41-a333c6b9181d&displaylang=en
>
> Once you've downloaded and installed these, you'll need to configure
> your environment variables. Here's what my vcvars32.bat file looks
> like: (Sorry about the line breaks. You'll need to remove those.)
>
> @echo off
> Set PATH=C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual C++ Toolkit
> 2003\bin;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Platform SDK\Bin;C:\Program
> Files\Microsoft Platform SDK\Bin\win64\x86\AMD64;%PATH%
> Set INCLUDE=C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual C++ Toolkit
> 2003\include;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Platform
> SDK\Include;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio .NET
> 2003\Vc7\include;%INCLUDE%
> Set LIB=C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual C++ Toolkit
> 2003\lib;C:\Program Files\Microsoft Platform SDK\Lib;C:\Program
> Files\Microsoft Visual Studio .NET 2003\Vc7\lib;%LIB%
>
> Those should be the default installation folders for the Microsoft
> tools, but if you put them elsewhere, simply modify the batch file to
> suit. Note that you need the AMD64 tools in your path even if you
> have a 32bit machine. For some crazy reason, that's where Microsoft
> put some of the important tools.
>
> Download the latest Ruby release from:
> http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/20020102.html
> You can either get the 1.8.4 release, or the 'stable snapshot', which
> includes fixes since the last release. The first time you try to get
> this working, I recommend the regular release.
>
> Uncompress the download into a folder that doesn't have any spaces in the
> name.
> For the purposes of this howto, let's say that's c:\ruby-src\
> If I explained myself clearly, you will now have a folder called
> c:\ruby-src\ruby-1.8.4\, with various things under it, including
> c:\ruby-src\ruby-1.8.4\win32\
> If you download a different release than 1.8.4, that folder name might
> be different.
>
> To avoid cluttering up this directory with temporary files, we'll do
> the actual build elsewhere.
> Make a folder called c:\ruby-src\build\
>
> Open a command prompt by clicking a shortcut, or typing "cmd" into the
> Start -> Run prompt.
> Run the "vcvars32.bat" file you made earlier, which will add the
> Microsoft tools to your environment. This means, by the way, that it
> should be somewhere in your default PATH.
>
> ==== SCARY HACK SECTION ====
> The Microsoft tools previously included a pair of utilities, "lib" and
> "dumpbin", which acted as front-ends for the "link.exe" command.
> Luckily, the 64bit directory in the Platform SDK includes "lib.exe",
> but we still need to deal with dumpbin.exe. Sadly, none of the free
> downloads seem to include it.
> Ruby 1.9/2.0 shouldn't have this problem, and you can skip this step
> if you have the full Visual Studio 2003.
>
> Go to c:\ruby-src\ruby-1.8.4\win32\, and edit the following file:
> mkexports.rb
> On line 6, change the command inside the double-quotes of IO.foreach.
> change: "|dumpbin -symbols "
> to: "|link /dump /symbols "
> Don't forget the space at the end.
> ==== END SCARY HACK ====
>
> Change your current directory to c:\ruby-src\build\
> Run the following commands, in order:
> c:\ruby-src\ruby-1.8.4\win32\configure.bat (yes, you need to refer to
> it by its full path.)
> nmake
> nmake test
> nmake DESTDIR=c:/ruby install
> The final command allows you to specify where you actually want Ruby
> to be installed.
> Note the forward slash instead of backslash.
> There are more examples in the README.win32 file, found in the
> c:\ruby-src\ruby-1.8.4\win32\ folder.
>
> So simple, even a child could operate it!
>
>--
All the best
Glenn
Aylesbury, UK
Austin Ziegler wrote:
No. Of the choices, MSYS/MINGW is going to work most like Unix. MSVC6
is no longer available for legal download. But...VS.NET (2002 & 2003) & VS (2005) use a later MSVC runtime DLL (7, 7.1,
and 8.0) that are different than the MSVC6 runtime DLL. The MSVC8 DLL
is significantly different even than VS.NET (7, 7.1).I am also working, in fits and starts, on compile instructions for cl
14 (VS 2005) with the currently-free Express version. This will be
something that ultimately can go through the entire Ruby build process
and build something like the one-click installer for you.-austin
This sounds pretty complicated as a DIY solution or a project goal. I
certainly applaud your efforts in accomplishing this. Seeing that
Microsoft's runtime distros are a moving target it doesn't appear to be
a no-brainer for sure 
While exploring other programming languages I downloaded EiffelStudio
for Windows last month. This took awhile to download and certainly took
awhile to build, but the process was automated and required little
interaction on the enduser's part. If I am not mistaken the
installation routine actually pulled in its own Borland C Compiler
directory tree to do the build. Since BCC was packaged within the
installation routine all of the compiler/linker environmental
conditions were inherently set. Not that I particularly found Eiffel to
be an enjoyable language, but at least the installation/build on
Windows was a no-brainer.
Yes I should point out that no offence was meant to you with my previous
email. :o)
On 15/03/06, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@gmail.com> wrote:
I know you were kidding, but I felt like sending an e-mail, so..
A more fair comparison would be a set of Ruby build instructions for a
Linux distro that didn't ship with a package manager or a copy of GCC.
Highly nontrivial.
Did I say "instructions?"
This will also include batch files to do certain things.
Most things, in fact. Since the VS 2005 builds require patches on
almost everything.
-austin
On 3/15/06, gregarican <greg.kujawa@gmail.com> wrote:
Austin Ziegler wrote:
> No. Of the choices, MSYS/MINGW is going to work most like Unix. MSVC6
> is no longer available for legal download. But...
>
> VS.NET (2002 & 2003) & VS (2005) use a later MSVC runtime DLL (7, 7.1,
> and 8.0) that are different than the MSVC6 runtime DLL. The MSVC8 DLL
> is significantly different even than VS.NET (7, 7.1).
>
>
> I am also working, in fits and starts, on compile instructions for cl
> 14 (VS 2005) with the currently-free Express version. This will be
> something that ultimately can go through the entire Ruby build process
> and build something like the one-click installer for you.
>
>
> -austinThis sounds pretty complicated as a DIY solution or a project goal. I
certainly applaud your efforts in accomplishing this. Seeing that
Microsoft's runtime distros are a moving target it doesn't appear to be
a no-brainer for sure
--
Austin Ziegler * halostatue@gmail.com
* Alternate: austin@halostatue.ca
Yeah, I knew that.. Didn't mean for my response to come out sounding defensive.
Windows is a discipline, like hair shirts or nettle brushes for monks.
It focuses the mind.
On 3/15/06, Glenn Smith <glenn.ruby@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes I should point out that no offence was meant to you with my previous
email. :o)On 15/03/06, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I know you were kidding, but I felt like sending an e-mail, so..
> A more fair comparison would be a set of Ruby build instructions for a
> Linux distro that didn't ship with a package manager or a copy of GCC.
> Highly nontrivial.
>
I think what would be nice to achieve from all this is that when Matz and
his gang release a new version of Ruby, somebody could either take this code
and compile it using a HOW-TO, or for people who don't want to have the
hassle, quickly download a pre-compiled version. This doesn't have to be
anything fancy, such as Curt's installer, just a zip-file which you extract
and there you are - a basic c:\ruby structure (or wherever). Perhaps a
short PDF or HTML file in the root with a "getting started". It might be
sensible to try to get rubygems integrated into this somehow but maybe not
immediately.
I think there is genuine benefit in making this available to the wider world
so that more people will at the very least get to have a look at Ruby who
may not have bothered when all they see is a tar.gz without too much in the
way of Windows help. Like it or not, plenty of Windows users out there...!
It seems a small but important step forward. I'm certainly not trying to
take away Curt's job (unless he wants me to!) - there is definitely in my
view a place for the one-click installer with all of it's goodies, but for
many a basic ruby install would suffice and for others they could take this
install and build on it with ruby gems and so on to create their preferred
environment.
I'm not sure *how* I can help at this point, but if I can then I will, now
and in the future. I would like to find a way to help the community in
some way, just not sure where my niche is at the moment.
On 15/03/06, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@gmail.com> wrote:
Yeah, I knew that.. Didn't mean for my response to come out sounding
defensive.
Windows is a discipline, like hair shirts or nettle brushes for monks.
It focuses the mind.On 3/15/06, Glenn Smith <glenn.ruby@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes I should point out that no offence was meant to you with my previous
> email. :o)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 15/03/06, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I know you were kidding, but I felt like sending an e-mail, so..
> > A more fair comparison would be a set of Ruby build instructions for a
> > Linux distro that didn't ship with a package manager or a copy of GCC.
> > Highly nontrivial.
> >
>
>
--
All the best
Glenn
Aylesbury, UK
Just checking.. do you know about this page?
http://www.garbagecollect.jp/ruby/mswin32/
They release new stable versions of Ruby there, very quickly after an
official release comes out. They are built with Visual Studio, and
come packaged in a zip file.
I agree that it could use some extra documentation and publicity,
though. Curt's installer is nice, but contains more software than
many people need.
On 3/15/06, Glenn Smith <glenn.ruby@gmail.com> wrote:
I think what would be nice to achieve from all this is that when Matz and
his gang release a new version of Ruby, somebody could either take this code
and compile it using a HOW-TO, or for people who don't want to have the
hassle, quickly download a pre-compiled version. This doesn't have to be
anything fancy, such as Curt's installer, just a zip-file which you extract
and there you are - a basic c:\ruby structure (or wherever). Perhaps a
short PDF or HTML file in the root with a "getting started". It might be
sensible to try to get rubygems integrated into this somehow but maybe not
immediately.I think there is genuine benefit in making this available to the wider world
so that more people will at the very least get to have a look at Ruby who
may not have bothered when all they see is a tar.gz without too much in the
way of Windows help. Like it or not, plenty of Windows users out there...!
It seems a small but important step forward. I'm certainly not trying to
take away Curt's job (unless he wants me to!) - there is definitely in my
view a place for the one-click installer with all of it's goodies, but for
many a basic ruby install would suffice and for others they could take this
install and build on it with ruby gems and so on to create their preferred
environment.I'm not sure *how* I can help at this point, but if I can then I will, now
and in the future. I would like to find a way to help the community in
some way, just not sure where my niche is at the moment.On 15/03/06, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Yeah, I knew that.. Didn't mean for my response to come out sounding
> defensive.
> Windows is a discipline, like hair shirts or nettle brushes for monks.
> It focuses the mind.
>
> On 3/15/06, Glenn Smith <glenn.ruby@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Yes I should point out that no offence was meant to you with my previous
> > email. :o)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 15/03/06, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I know you were kidding, but I felt like sending an e-mail, so..
> > > A more fair comparison would be a set of Ruby build instructions for a
> > > Linux distro that didn't ship with a package manager or a copy of GCC.
> > > Highly nontrivial.
> > >
> >
> >
>
>--
All the best
Glenn
Aylesbury, UK
I think what would be nice to achieve from all this is that when Matz and
his gang release a new version of Ruby, somebody could either take this code
and compile it using a HOW-TO, or for people who don't want to have the
hassle, quickly download a pre-compiled version. This doesn't have to be
anything fancy, such as Curt's installer, just a zip-file which you extract
and there you are - a basic c:\ruby structure (or wherever). Perhaps a
short PDF or HTML file in the root with a "getting started". It might be
sensible to try to get rubygems integrated into this somehow but maybe not
immediately.
Ok here's my contribution - I hope it is helpful:
I don't know what to do except follow Wilson's instructions if you
don't already have a working compiler. But if you already have a
commercial VisualStudio .NET, there should already be a vsvars32.bat
under ...\Common7\Tools. There will probably also be a shortcut to it
called "Visual Studio Command Prompt" in the program menu under
VisualStudio .Net Tools. So to compile ruby for yourself:
1) Download and unzip the ruby source
2) run vsvars.bat
3) then in that command prompt run the attached batch file
buildruby.bat SOURCE_DIR [ INSTALL_DIR [ BUILD_DIR ] ]
where SOURCE_DIR is the path to the source
(<unzip_location>\Ruby-1.8.4 if you got the latest stable version) and
INSTALL_DIR is the location you want ruby to go. They must be
different directories. The intermediate files go into BUILD_DIR,
which defaults to INSTALL_DIR/Build if you don't specify it. All
these paths can be absolute or relative. SOURCE_DIR must exist and
contain ruby source, but the other two will be created if they don't
exist.
4) change to INSTALL_DIR and type ruby -v.
Tada!
This is tested with Visual Studio .NET and Visual Studio .NET 2003, on
Windows XP and
Windows 2000. Please let me know if you find any issues with it. I'd
especially like to know if it works after following Wilson's
instructions to the point of creating vsvars.bat.
-Adam
buildruby.batch (1.4 KB)
On 3/15/06, Glenn Smith <glenn.ruby@gmail.com> wrote:
Yep. Personally I just need Ruby and Rubygems. Once I've got those
anything else I can get myself.
I think I vaguely remember seeing that site but haven't tried it. Maybe
I'll give it a go (site appears down at the moment).
First test (for me) will be: does RUDL work with it?
On 15/03/06, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@gmail.com> wrote:
Just checking.. do you know about this page?
Index of /ruby/mswin32
They release new stable versions of Ruby there, very quickly after an
official release comes out. They are built with Visual Studio, and
come packaged in a zip file.
I agree that it could use some extra documentation and publicity,
though. Curt's installer is nice, but contains more software than
many people need.On 3/15/06, Glenn Smith <glenn.ruby@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think what would be nice to achieve from all this is that when Matz
and
> his gang release a new version of Ruby, somebody could either take this
code
> and compile it using a HOW-TO, or for people who don't want to have the
> hassle, quickly download a pre-compiled version. This doesn't have to
be
> anything fancy, such as Curt's installer, just a zip-file which you
extract
> and there you are - a basic c:\ruby structure (or wherever). Perhaps a
> short PDF or HTML file in the root with a "getting started". It might
be
> sensible to try to get rubygems integrated into this somehow but maybe
not
> immediately.
>
> I think there is genuine benefit in making this available to the wider
world
> so that more people will at the very least get to have a look at Ruby
who
> may not have bothered when all they see is a tar.gz without too much in
the
> way of Windows help. Like it or not, plenty of Windows users out
there...!
> It seems a small but important step forward. I'm certainly not trying
to
> take away Curt's job (unless he wants me to!) - there is definitely in
my
> view a place for the one-click installer with all of it's goodies, but
for
> many a basic ruby install would suffice and for others they could take
this
> install and build on it with ruby gems and so on to create their
preferred
> environment.
>
> I'm not sure *how* I can help at this point, but if I can then I will,
now
> and in the future. I would like to find a way to help the community in
> some way, just not sure where my niche is at the moment.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 15/03/06, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, I knew that.. Didn't mean for my response to come out sounding
> > defensive.
> > Windows is a discipline, like hair shirts or nettle brushes for monks.
> > It focuses the mind.
> >
> > On 3/15/06, Glenn Smith <glenn.ruby@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Yes I should point out that no offence was meant to you with my
previous
> > > email. :o)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 15/03/06, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I know you were kidding, but I felt like sending an e-mail, so..
> > > > A more fair comparison would be a set of Ruby build instructions
for a
> > > > Linux distro that didn't ship with a package manager or a copy of
GCC.
> > > > Highly nontrivial.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> All the best
> Glenn
> Aylesbury, UK
>
>
--
All the best
Glenn
Aylesbury, UK
Just tried the version at Index of /ruby/mswin32
When I run IRB I get "readline.dll not found".
Basically if Curt goes under a bus, we're all doomed ('specially Curt!) :o)
On 15/03/06, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@gmail.com> wrote:
Just checking.. do you know about this page?
Index of /ruby/mswin32
They release new stable versions of Ruby there, very quickly after an
official release comes out. They are built with Visual Studio, and
come packaged in a zip file.
I agree that it could use some extra documentation and publicity,
though. Curt's installer is nice, but contains more software than
many people need.On 3/15/06, Glenn Smith <glenn.ruby@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think what would be nice to achieve from all this is that when Matz
and
> his gang release a new version of Ruby, somebody could either take this
code
> and compile it using a HOW-TO, or for people who don't want to have the
> hassle, quickly download a pre-compiled version. This doesn't have to
be
> anything fancy, such as Curt's installer, just a zip-file which you
extract
> and there you are - a basic c:\ruby structure (or wherever). Perhaps a
> short PDF or HTML file in the root with a "getting started". It might
be
> sensible to try to get rubygems integrated into this somehow but maybe
not
> immediately.
>
> I think there is genuine benefit in making this available to the wider
world
> so that more people will at the very least get to have a look at Ruby
who
> may not have bothered when all they see is a tar.gz without too much in
the
> way of Windows help. Like it or not, plenty of Windows users out
there...!
> It seems a small but important step forward. I'm certainly not trying
to
> take away Curt's job (unless he wants me to!) - there is definitely in
my
> view a place for the one-click installer with all of it's goodies, but
for
> many a basic ruby install would suffice and for others they could take
this
> install and build on it with ruby gems and so on to create their
preferred
> environment.
>
> I'm not sure *how* I can help at this point, but if I can then I will,
now
> and in the future. I would like to find a way to help the community in
> some way, just not sure where my niche is at the moment.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 15/03/06, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, I knew that.. Didn't mean for my response to come out sounding
> > defensive.
> > Windows is a discipline, like hair shirts or nettle brushes for monks.
> > It focuses the mind.
> >
> > On 3/15/06, Glenn Smith <glenn.ruby@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Yes I should point out that no offence was meant to you with my
previous
> > > email. :o)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 15/03/06, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I know you were kidding, but I felt like sending an e-mail, so..
> > > > A more fair comparison would be a set of Ruby build instructions
for a
> > > > Linux distro that didn't ship with a package manager or a copy of
GCC.
> > > > Highly nontrivial.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> All the best
> Glenn
> Aylesbury, UK
>
>
--
All the best
Glenn
Aylesbury, UK
You can get readline (and various other things) from this page:
http://www.garbagecollect.jp/ruby/mswin32/en/documents/install.html
On 3/16/06, Glenn Smith <glenn.ruby@gmail.com> wrote:
Just tried the version at Index of /ruby/mswin32
When I run IRB I get "readline.dll not found".
Basically if Curt goes under a bus, we're all doomed ('specially Curt!) :o)
On 15/03/06, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Just checking.. do you know about this page?
> Index of /ruby/mswin32
> They release new stable versions of Ruby there, very quickly after an
> official release comes out. They are built with Visual Studio, and
> come packaged in a zip file.
> I agree that it could use some extra documentation and publicity,
> though. Curt's installer is nice, but contains more software than
> many people need.
>
> On 3/15/06, Glenn Smith <glenn.ruby@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think what would be nice to achieve from all this is that when Matz
> and
> > his gang release a new version of Ruby, somebody could either take this
> code
> > and compile it using a HOW-TO, or for people who don't want to have the
> > hassle, quickly download a pre-compiled version. This doesn't have to
> be
> > anything fancy, such as Curt's installer, just a zip-file which you
> extract
> > and there you are - a basic c:\ruby structure (or wherever). Perhaps a
> > short PDF or HTML file in the root with a "getting started". It might
> be
> > sensible to try to get rubygems integrated into this somehow but maybe
> not
> > immediately.
> >
> > I think there is genuine benefit in making this available to the wider
> world
> > so that more people will at the very least get to have a look at Ruby
> who
> > may not have bothered when all they see is a tar.gz without too much in
> the
> > way of Windows help. Like it or not, plenty of Windows users out
> there...!
> > It seems a small but important step forward. I'm certainly not trying
> to
> > take away Curt's job (unless he wants me to!) - there is definitely in
> my
> > view a place for the one-click installer with all of it's goodies, but
> for
> > many a basic ruby install would suffice and for others they could take
> this
> > install and build on it with ruby gems and so on to create their
> preferred
> > environment.
> >
> > I'm not sure *how* I can help at this point, but if I can then I will,
> now
> > and in the future. I would like to find a way to help the community in
> > some way, just not sure where my niche is at the moment.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 15/03/06, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Yeah, I knew that.. Didn't mean for my response to come out sounding
> > > defensive.
> > > Windows is a discipline, like hair shirts or nettle brushes for monks.
> > > It focuses the mind.
> > >
> > > On 3/15/06, Glenn Smith <glenn.ruby@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Yes I should point out that no offence was meant to you with my
> previous
> > > > email. :o)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 15/03/06, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I know you were kidding, but I felt like sending an e-mail, so..
> > > > > A more fair comparison would be a set of Ruby build instructions
> for a
> > > > > Linux distro that didn't ship with a package manager or a copy of
> GCC.
> > > > > Highly nontrivial.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > All the best
> > Glenn
> > Aylesbury, UK
> >
> >
>
>--
All the best
Glenn
Aylesbury, UK
Naaa... The One-Click Installer is an open source project, and all of
the instructions and build scripts are checked in to subversion on
RubyForge:
http://rubyforge.org/scm/?group_id=167
Besides, there are other people on the OCI team, and I could always
use more help if anyone wants to volunteer!
Curt
On 3/16/06, Glenn Smith <glenn.ruby@gmail.com> wrote:
Just tried the version at Index of /ruby/mswin32
When I run IRB I get "readline.dll not found".
Basically if Curt goes under a bus, we're all doomed ('specially Curt!) :o)
Which trunk is the latest, Curt - installer-win2
?<http://rubyforge.org/plugins/scmsvn/viewcvs.php/trunk/installer-win2/?root=rubyinstaller>
On 16/03/06, Curt Hibbs <ml.chibbs@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/16/06, Glenn Smith <glenn.ruby@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just tried the version at Index of /ruby/mswin32
>
> When I run IRB I get "readline.dll not found".
>
> Basically if Curt goes under a bus, we're all doomed ('specially Curt!)
:o)Naaa... The One-Click Installer is an open source project, and all of
the instructions and build scripts are checked in to subversion on
RubyForge:http://rubyforge.org/scm/?group_id=167
Besides, there are other people on the OCI team, and I could always
use more help if anyone wants to volunteer!Curt
--
All the best
Glenn
Aylesbury, UK