Mauricio Fernández wrote:
(Here I'm trying to install the packages into c:/ruby-rpa/ and related subdirectories)
c:/ruby/lib/ruby/1.8/fileutils.rb:181:in `mkdir': Invalid argument - c:/ruby-rpa/c: (Errno::EINVAL)
Thank you for your report. It helped me find a stupid bug which was triggered
when one didn't use ruby's own $prefix.
Sweet. Thanks.
Since the issue affects the bootstrapping phase (i.e. can't be fixed
with a normal self-upgrade), I have decided to release 0.2.1pre1, available
at http://rubyforge.org/frs/?group_id=265\. Please tell me if it solves
your problems.Please keep in mind the following:
* when answering to the questions in the bootstrap phase, only the first
path is absolute (will default to Ruby's own $prefix, e.g. c:\ruby
normally on win32). The others are relative to the former and the
default values should be perfectly fine.
Ah. I thought the default paths, as presented by the installer, were complete paths. So I kept entering complete paths. The prompts gave no indication that my earlier paths would be reused to build the other paths.
* setting the $prefix to c:\ruby-rpa means that rpa-base itself will be
put there; you will have to set PATH to point to c:\ruby-rpa\bin too,
and adjust RUBYLIB (something like c:\ruby-rpa\lib\ruby\site_ruby\1.8, but not 100% sure).
As of now, it is probably better to just install into the normal
$prefix, since rpa-base provides enough guarantees to make sure it
won't end up cluttered with half-installed RPA ports.
Are you *sure*? I've had enough issues with installing/uninstalling/reinstalling assorted versions of the 1-click package. I don't want any overlap between this and my main ruby installation.
Support for per-user installations is planned and might be done in
time for 0.3.0.
Nice.
...
there may be many other reasons why people prefer not to use rpa; poor Windows support being a real possibility.
There are good reasons for using both RubyGems and rpa-base, and you
can indeed use them both at a time.I am sure more bugs will be found in rpa-base's codebase, just as in
any other piece of sw.; I believe the bases are solid, though (I haven't
touched the transactional code lately, but last time I did the count was
at 500000 successful transactions since the last real bug in that area).
So far I've managed to fix all reported bugs in under 1-2 days (those
that were reported via IRC were typically fixed within a few hours).Now, regarding my original question, is there anything you'd like to
see packaged?
I don't know yet. I need to see how much disk space this takes up as is, and see what's installed, and what I might use. You've probably covered all the things I need. I have a few alpha/beta projects on rubyforge. They tend have been created to scratch a personal itch, so if they're not currently on your list then it's unlikely there is much demand for them.
I'll go see if I can get this to play well on my laptop.
Thanks,
James
···
On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 02:42:02AM +0900, James Britt wrote:
