Looks like I will have a chance to play around with a small fleet of
Gumstix (http://www.gumstix.org/). Does anyone have any experience with
ruby on them? (They have linux 2.6 on flash, Intel XScale processor, and
gcc 3.4 toolchain, so it seems hopeful...)
···
--
vjoel : Joel VanderWerf : path berkeley edu : 510 665 3407
Looks like I will have a chance to play around with a small fleet of
Gumstix (http://www.gumstix.org/\). Does anyone have any experience with
ruby on them? (They have linux 2.6 on flash, Intel XScale processor, and
gcc 3.4 toolchain, so it seems hopeful...)
Duuude. I'm drooling here.
If I had infinite time, I'd be sticking Linux add-ons to my
toaster and coffeemaker.
That thing is no ADDON. NetBSD is *driving* the toaster. And oh yeah. Ruby
should run on it, too
Regards,
-Martin
···
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 06:43:49PM +0900, Hal Fulton wrote:
Joel VanderWerf wrote:
>Looks like I will have a chance to play around with a small fleet of
>Gumstix (http://www.gumstix.org/\). Does anyone have any experience with
>ruby on them? (They have linux 2.6 on flash, Intel XScale processor, and
>gcc 3.4 toolchain, so it seems hopeful...)
Duuude. I'm drooling here.
If I had infinite time, I'd be sticking Linux add-ons to my
toaster and coffeemaker.
Looks like I will have a chance to play around with a small fleet of
Gumstix (http://www.gumstix.org/\). Does anyone have any experience with
ruby on them? (They have linux 2.6 on flash, Intel XScale processor, and
gcc 3.4 toolchain, so it seems hopeful...)
Duuude. I'm drooling here.
If I had infinite time, I'd be sticking Linux add-ons to my
toaster and coffeemaker.
Well, to answer my own post, it looks like ruby is buildable, and may
make it into the standard set of tools: