The RaaInstallInRuby petition now has more signers than the YamlInRuby
peition. So will we see raa-install included in 1.8.0?
see: http://www.rubygarden.org/ruby?RaaInstallInRuby
Phil
The RaaInstallInRuby petition now has more signers than the YamlInRuby
peition. So will we see raa-install included in 1.8.0?
I didn’t know it was a race. 
Seriously, I like raa-install, but I would
like to see Windows compatibility addressed.
I am weaning myself off Windows, but many
other people still use it. And since Ruby
works pretty well with Windows, then, in
general, the things that go with it should,
too. (There will always be exceptions such
as things that depend heavily on fork() or
whatever.)
I’d also like to see raa-install with a little
less screen clutter (see the earlier thread
about dots and carriage returns).
Hal
···
----- Original Message -----
From: “Phil Tomson” ptkwt@shell1.aracnet.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ruby
To: “ruby-talk ML” ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 1:57 PM
Subject: RaaInstallInRuby petition
Hello,
just a quick question. Does raainstall support installation to
non-standard folders (so that, even if i’m not root, i can use it to
install packages to for my local ruby) ?
···
On Sat, Jun 14, 2003, Phil Tomson wrote:
The RaaInstallInRuby petition now has more signers than the YamlInRuby
peition. So will we see raa-install included in 1.8.0?see: http://www.rubygarden.org/ruby?RaaInstallInRuby
Phil
–
Pierre Baillet
Emacs, not just a way of life but a complete waste of disk space
Alan Cox
Seriously, I like raa-install, but I would
like to see Windows compatibility addressed.
Windows compatibility is pretty good, I think - though I haven’t tested
it much - Patrick May did a bunch testing and fixes for Windows.
The main problem is stuff that needs a C compiler, but we need a binary
packaging system to work around that.
I am weaning myself off Windows, but many
other people still use it. And since Ruby
works pretty well with Windows, then, in
general, the things that go with it should,
too. (There will always be exceptions such
as things that depend heavily on fork() or
whatever.)I’d also like to see raa-install with a little
less screen clutter (see the earlier thread
about dots and carriage returns).
What was the consensus? We can implement whatever is required.
-Tom
···
On Fri, 2003-06-13 at 15:20, Hal E. Fulton wrote:
I am weaning myself off Windows, but many
other people still use it. And since Ruby
works pretty well with Windows, then, in
general, the things that go with it should,
too. (There will always be exceptions such
as things that depend heavily on fork() or
whatever.)
I use Windows almost exclusively and Ruby has always worked quite well
there for me.
I’d also like to see raa-install with a little
less screen clutter (see the earlier thread
about dots and carriage returns).
I’d like to see raa-install show me a version number in searches. For
example, after reading the announcement this morning about the latest
REXML, I used raa-install and searched for it. I got two hits:
rexml
rexml-stable
It would have been really handy if there had been a version number so I
would know. I assumed that the 2.7.0 was so new that it wouldn’t be in the
RAA yet, but I still wanted to check.
···
On Sat, 14 Jun 2003 04:20:04 +0900, “Hal E. Fulton” hal9000@hypermetrics.com wrote:
–
Dean saor, dean saor an spiorad. Is seinn d’orain beo.
It doesn’t, but could be added - though the underlying installer that
comes with the package would need to support it, I don’t know off hand
if this will be a problem.
I will add it to the list of things to do.
-Tom
···
On Fri, 2003-06-13 at 15:30, Pierre Baillet wrote:
Hello,
just a quick question. Does raainstall support installation to
non-standard folders (so that, even if i’m not root, i can use it to
install packages to for my local ruby) ?On Sat, Jun 14, 2003, Phil Tomson wrote:
The RaaInstallInRuby petition now has more signers than the YamlInRuby
peition. So will we see raa-install included in 1.8.0?see: http://www.rubygarden.org/ruby?RaaInstallInRuby
Phil
In article 02e301c331e1$ab183980$0300a8c0@austin.rr.com,
···
Hal E. Fulton hal9000@hypermetrics.com wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: “Phil Tomson” ptkwt@shell1.aracnet.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ruby
To: “ruby-talk ML” ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 1:57 PM
Subject: RaaInstallInRuby petitionThe RaaInstallInRuby petition now has more signers than the YamlInRuby
peition. So will we see raa-install included in 1.8.0?I didn’t know it was a race.
The implication being that since YAML was accepted into 1.8 with less
signatures, raa-install should be eligible for inclusion. No, it isn’t a
race.
Phil
That’s a good idea. And actually the version in CVS alredy keeps track
of the version you installed too. We’ll modify it to support versions in
searches.
-Tom
···
On Fri, 2003-06-13 at 15:35, Joey Gibson wrote:
I’d like to see raa-install show me a version number in searches. For
example, after reading the announcement this morning about the latest
REXML, I used raa-install and searched for it. I got two hits:
Seriously, I like raa-install, but I would
like to see Windows compatibility addressed.Windows compatibility is pretty good, I think - though I haven’t tested
it much - Patrick May did a bunch testing and fixes for Windows.
Was that recently? I tried it a few months ago
on win98 and had some problems.
The main problem is stuff that needs a C compiler, but we need a binary
packaging system to work around that.
What does it do now in that case?
You could perhaps search for gcc.exe (perhaps only
in the PATH) and use that if it’s available. Other
than that, I have no real ideas for standardizing that.
I’d also like to see raa-install with a little
less screen clutter (see the earlier thread
about dots and carriage returns).What was the consensus? We can implement whatever is required.
I don’t know that there was a consensus. And
since I was the only one who complained, maybe
you should just ignore me.
I just thought the dots were intrusive and could be
replaced with (for example) an overwritten line with
a counter. And someone (Michael Campbell?) pointed out
that it’s dangerous to make assumptions about the
terminal environment – e.g., sometimes backspaces and
such are not interpreted correctly. But I think that
restricting it to a simple carriage return is safe
everywhere.
My $0.02,
Hal
My $0.02:
I think raa-install is excellent and I use it regularly. I have no
opinion about YAML or REXML because I’ve never used them. I have
nothing against petitions. I trust Matz’s judgment and that of the
ruby-core team.
I just don’t think that the problem space is sufficiently stable to put
a package manager in the standard library – which, by the way, is not
a criticism of raa-install or anyone else.
Regards,
Mark Wilson
In article 02e301c331e1$ab183980$0300a8c0@austin.rr.com,
From: “Phil Tomson” ptkwt@shell1.aracnet.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ruby
To: “ruby-talk ML” ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 1:57 PM
Subject: RaaInstallInRuby petitionThe RaaInstallInRuby petition now has more signers than the YamlInRuby
peition. So will we see raa-install included in 1.8.0?I didn’t know it was a race.
The implication being that since YAML was accepted into 1.8 with less
signatures, raa-install should be eligible for inclusion. No, it isn’t a
race.
I knew what you meant. I was just being silly.
I’m in favor of raa-install though I haven’t
signed the petition.
I’ve been meaning to learn (the|any) nuances
of raa-install so as to enable things that I
release in the future. That’s on the wiki,
isn’t it?
Hal
···
----- Original Message -----
From: “Phil Tomson” ptkwt@shell1.aracnet.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ruby
To: “ruby-talk ML” ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 3:37 PM
Subject: Re: RaaInstallInRuby petition
Hal E. Fulton hal9000@hypermetrics.com wrote:
----- Original Message -----
Seriously, I like raa-install, but I would
like to see Windows compatibility addressed.Windows compatibility is pretty good, I think - though I haven’t tested
it much - Patrick May did a bunch testing and fixes for Windows.Was that recently? I tried it a few months ago
on win98 and had some problems.
I don’t recall, and he probably didn’t test on 98. Worth a try though.
The main problem is stuff that needs a C compiler, but we need a binary
packaging system to work around that.What does it do now in that case?
Actually because RAA-Install just calls the install.rb that comes in the
package it works just as well or just as badly as if you tried to
install the package by hand.
-Tom
···
On Fri, 2003-06-13 at 15:54, Hal E. Fulton wrote:
On Fri, 2003-06-13 at 15:20, Hal E. Fulton wrote:
I just thought the dots were intrusive and could be
replaced with (for example) an overwritten line with
a counter. And someone (Michael Campbell?) pointed out
that it’s dangerous to make assumptions about the
terminal environment – e.g., sometimes backspaces and
such are not interpreted correctly. But I think that
restricting it to a simple carriage return is safe
everywhere.
Correct on all counts. “\r” worked everywhere I tried it.
I still like dots though. =)
···
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook™.
http://calendar.yahoo.com
Why do you say it’s unstable? RAA-Install (+RAA) is essentially a CPAN
clone, give or take, and that’s a fairly long lived project which people
get great value from.
There are probably some works of genius still to be created, but in the
meantime would it not be worth being able to easily install packages?
-Tom
···
On Fri, 2003-06-13 at 17:54, Mark Wilson wrote:
I just don’t think that the problem space is sufficiently stable to put
a package manager in the standard library – which, by the way, is not
a criticism of raa-install or anyone else.
In article 99203F8C-9DE9-11D7-8F52-000393876156@cox.net,
···
Mark Wilson mwilson13@cox.net wrote:
My $0.02:
I think raa-install is excellent and I use it regularly. I have no
opinion about YAML or REXML because I’ve never used them. I have
nothing against petitions. I trust Matz’s judgment and that of the
ruby-core team.I just don’t think that the problem space is sufficiently stable to put
a package manager in the standard library – which, by the way, is not
a criticism of raa-install or anyone else.
Well, it’s a chicken-and-egg problem. We need a package manager available
in the standard distro in order for people to start using package
management and in order to reduce the numer of variables in the problems
space.
Phil
It’s not the standard library, it’s the standard distribution. I
think that makes enough of a difference - it’s not so much a part of
ruby as a tool that gets distributed alongside.
martin
···
Mark Wilson mwilson13@cox.net wrote:
I just don’t think that the problem space is sufficiently stable to put
a package manager in the standard library – which, by the way, is not
a criticism of raa-install or anyone else.
chicken-egg, egg-chicken … I see your point. Ruby and package
management should probably start making some concrete progress beyond
discussions given that (1) there is an application, (2) directory
structure and package contents have been discussed and (3) there are
several workable approaches to installation (at least as to Ruby
programs and extensions).
Regards,
Mark
P.S. One pet peeve for some developers of excellent programs as to
package documentation. I get irritated when I open README.txt and get a
one line document telling me that the real readme document is somewhere
else. It makes me feel stupid for looking at the directory and deciding
to read the document titled README.
P.P.S. I also don’t like documentation that is in html only. I like to
‘less’ through documentation.
···
On Friday, June 13, 2003, at 07:38 PM, Phil Tomson wrote:
[snip]
Well, it’s a chicken-and-egg problem. We need a package manager
available
in the standard distro in order for people to start using package
management and in order to reduce the numer of variables in the
problems
space.Phil
Right. Where I said standard library I meant to say standard
distribution.
···
On Saturday, June 14, 2003, at 05:01 AM, Martin DeMello wrote:
Mark Wilson mwilson13@cox.net wrote:
I just don’t think that the problem space is sufficiently stable to
put
a package manager in the standard library – which, by the way, is not
a criticism of raa-install or anyone else.It’s not the standard library, it’s the standard distribution. I
think that makes enough of a difference - it’s not so much a part of
ruby as a tool that gets distributed alongside.martin