Are there any plans for a Ruby 1.9.1 One-Click Installer for Windows?
The current Ruby 1.8.6 One-Click Installer (see
http://rubyforge.org/frs/download.php/47082/ruby186-27_rc2.exe) seems
rather outdated.
– Benjamin L. Russell
Are there any plans for a Ruby 1.9.1 One-Click Installer for Windows?
The current Ruby 1.8.6 One-Click Installer (see
http://rubyforge.org/frs/download.php/47082/ruby186-27_rc2.exe) seems
rather outdated.
There’s plans for it…currently all there are are zip files
Here’s a blog on it:
http://blog.mmediasys.com/2009/05/05/rubyinstaller-state-of-one-click/
and a few instructions on unzipping them
Cheers!
-=r
You can also visit:
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 08:35:53 -0500, Roger P.
[email protected] wrote:
and a few instructions on unzipping them
I just read the sites referenced by both links, but although the site
referenced by the second one was entitled “ruby 1.9 one click
installer,” it actually seemed to be nothing more than instructions
for manually unzipping the {1.8.6,1.9}.7z file and the devkit.
Therefore, if I follow those instructions, I am likely still to be
missing the following components (all found in the 1.8.6 One-Click
Installer):
-
An uninstaller
-
Start Menu/Desktop logos/icons
-
Bundled Ruby documentation
-
Bundled Ruby Gems
-
Bundled fxri - Interactive Ruby Help & Console
-
Bundled SciTE
I already unzipped ruby-1.9.1-p0-i386-mswin32.zip several months ago,
but was disappointed by the lack of the above. The only component
that the instructions add to what I already have is the devkit.
Does this mean that the only way to have a 1.9.1 version equivalent to
the Ruby 1.8.6 One-Click Installer for Windows is to follow the
instructions at the site referenced by first link (entitled
“RubyInstaller - State of One-Click”) and perform the following steps
(essentially building and debugging one mostly from scratch)?
As a last resource, ask them join rubyinstaller-users list and ask questions
about to improve the cross-platform compatibility of their projects.
– Benjamin L. Russell
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 6:35 AM, Roger P.[email protected]
wrote:
and a few instructions on unzipping them
Am I missing something, in either the archives or the instructions, or
is the Ruby 1.9.1-p129 .7z archive missing all the ruby scripts that
should be in /bin? It seems to work fine if one unpacks those from the
1.9.1-p129 source archive from ruby-lang after following the
instructions you give, but I would assume that those should be
included, not need to be brought in separately.
I just read the sites referenced by both links, but although the site
referenced by the second one was entitled “ruby 1.9 one click
installer,” it actually seemed to be nothing more than instructions
for manually unzipping the {1.8.6,1.9}.7z file and the devkit.
Therefore, if I follow those instructions, I am likely still to be
missing the following components (all found in the 1.8.6 One-Click
Installer):
True–that ain’t a one click installer but more of manual steps for
installing a working ruby version (which otherwise would have taken far
more clicks).
An uninstaller
Start Menu/Desktop logos/icons
Bundled Ruby documentation
Bundled Ruby Gems
Bundled fxri - Interactive Ruby Help & Console
Bundled SciTE
those aren’t in the zip file [which ain’t a one click installer yet].
If you want all the goodies you’ll need to help the one click people out
to get it released.
I already unzipped ruby-1.9.1-p0-i386-mswin32.zip several months ago,
but was disappointed by the lack of the above. The only component
that the instructions add to what I already have is the devkit.
They also add openssl, libiconv, readline, etc. Other than that it
should be the same. Oh, and the devkit 
Does this mean that the only way to have a 1.9.1 version equivalent to
the Ruby 1.8.6 One-Click Installer for Windows is to follow the
instructions at the site referenced by first link (entitled
“RubyInstaller - State of One-Click”) and perform the following steps
(essentially building and debugging one mostly from scratch)?
I’m not sure I’ve never actually build the installer–it would appear
from luis’ post [1] that it is possible to build your own.
Cheers!
-=r
[1]
http://blog.mmediasys.com/2009/05/05/rubyinstaller-state-of-one-click/
Does this mean that the only way to have a 1.9.1 version equivalent to
the Ruby 1.8.6 One-Click Installer for Windows is to follow the
instructions at the site referenced by first link (entitled
“RubyInstaller - State of One-Click”) and perform the following steps
(essentially building and debugging one mostly from scratch)?
The wxruby folks have a ruby windows 1.9 installer, as well, now that I
think about it. Haven’t used it but you can try it.
-=r
http://rubyforge.org/frs/?group_id=35
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 12:28 AM, Christopher D.[email protected]
wrote:
Am I missing something, in either the archives or the instructions, or
is the Ruby 1.9.1-p129 .7z archive missing all the ruby scripts that
should be in /bin? It seems to work fine if one unpacks those from the
1.9.1-p129 source archive from ruby-lang after following the
instructions you give, but I would assume that those should be
included, not need to be brought in separately.
Are you talking about these?
erb
gem
irb
rake
rdoc
ri
testrb
I see them all in the bin dir of the .7z file.
On Jun 11, 1:35 am, Benjamin L. Russell [email protected]
wrote:
- An uninstaller
Sorry to be negative, but all the above points has been covered in
that post and previous ones about the missing or different features.
The packages are up to date, but lack installers since there LOT OF
THINGS to be fixed prior a mass release.
I already unzipped ruby-1.9.1-p0-i386-mswin32.zip several months ago,
but was disappointed by the lack of the above. The only component
that the instructions add to what I already have is the devkit.
mswin32 builds downloaded from ruby-lang must follow gargabecollect
instructions, please Google for that and you will find those.
Let’s make things clear: current One-Click Installer is built around
mswin32 builds downloaded from the same place, plus it downloads and
package all the things that you manually need to get if you download
the updated zip files.
I’ve tried to get the build instructions used by the garbagecollect
builders without luck. build One-Click Installer is a tedious task and
testing all the bundled component is even more.
The lack of the documentation as you mention is the lack of user
contributing to help built it. Ruby itself should be complicted to
use, you unpack and put it in the PATH, that’s it.
No gems or packages are bundled with it, since we are trying to put it
on diet and make it more easy to release updates.
Does this mean that the only way to have a 1.9.1 version equivalent to
the Ruby 1.8.6 One-Click Installer for Windows is to follow the
instructions at the site referenced by first link (entitled
“RubyInstaller - State of One-Click”) and perform the following steps
(essentially building and debugging one mostly from scratch)?
No, you could grab the binaries, unpack them, add to your PATH and on
newer versions update them.
Installers will be created, but are not top priority. Top priority is
make Ruby itself work, which is complicated since lot of tests are
failing on Windows.
Build from scratch is nothing different than what Linux or OSX users
did in the past.
Patches to the whole process, including documentation are welcome.
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 8:08 AM, Gordon T.[email protected]
wrote:
Are you talking about these?
erb
gem
irb
rake
rdoc
ri
testrbI see them all in the bin dir of the .7z file.
Huh. The only thing I see in ruby-1.9.1-p129-i386-mingw32\bin are the
ruby.exe and rubyw.exe binaries, a bunch of .dlls, and the .bat files
corresponding to each of the scripts you list each try to run ruby.exe
and pass it the relevant script, but not the ruby scripts themselves.
On Jun 12, 2:05 am, Christopher D. [email protected] wrote:
Are you talking about these?
Huh. The only thing I see in ruby-1.9.1-p129-i386-mingw32\bin are the
ruby.exe and rubyw.exe binaries, a bunch of .dlls, and the .bat files
corresponding to each of the scripts you list each try to run ruby.exe
and pass it the relevant script, but not the ruby scripts themselves.
Definitely there is a problem with what you unpacked.
I see irb and irb.bat, and all the other script files.
However, maybe you misunderstood: the package contains only Ruby, no
other Tool or library unless was bundled with Ruby itself from the
source code.
So, if you’re expecting get FXRuby or all the other packages you are
out of luck, mostly because none of those has been managed to get
working with MinGW and 1.9 at the same time.
Hi Luis,
I love reading you and Roger’s posts. 
You guys do a ton of work and
if no one else says it - many of us appreciate what you both have been
doing.
I gave up trying to create a full compile of Vexp 8.0 studio because you
were right - long long work to get it done. I have about half the
compiles finished. The ming version you have is just so much better.
@ others asking this,
I would recommend that you learn how to unpack the binaries like luis
suggested and add them to your path. By adding them to your path, when
you compile any newer ruby versions, they will be picked up and compiled
with the latest versions.
Personally, I think it would be easier to use binaries and compile ruby
because you can add features that might not be available or missing from
a one-click installer. For instance, TK is not in the present one-click
installer. If you add the binaries to your path though and follow the
walk through you can have that installed with your ruby version.
This is just an example and I’m in agreement with Luis…
Definitely there is a problem with what you unpacked.
I see irb and irb.bat, and all the other script files.
However, maybe you misunderstood: the package contains only Ruby, no
other Tool or library unless was bundled with Ruby itself from the
source code.
maybe this file isn’t complete
ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/binaries/mswin32/ruby-1.9.1-p0-i386-mswin32.zip
but this is
http://rubyinstaller.org/downloads/ruby-1.8.6-p368-i386-mingw32.7z
cheers!
-=r
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 4:50 AM, Luis L.[email protected]
wrote:
I see them all in the bin dir of the .7z file.
Huh. The only thing I see in ruby-1.9.1-p129-i386-mingw32\bin are the
ruby.exe and rubyw.exe binaries, a bunch of .dlls, and the .bat files
corresponding to each of the scripts you list each try to run ruby.exe
and pass it the relevant script, but not the ruby scripts themselves.Definitely there is a problem with what you unpacked.
I see irb and irb.bat, and all the other script files.
The problem appears to have been with the version of ZipGenius I was
using; it apparently misses files with no extension in .7z files (at
least, it seems to with the ones from the rubyinstaller page.) I’ve
never seen that with any of the other archive formats it supports, and
its not a bug that I would have expected. Downloaded the 7-Zip
application itself, and, indeed, the scripts are there.
On Jun 12, 10:01 pm, Christopher D. [email protected] wrote:
included, not need to be brought in separately.
The problem appears to have been with the version of ZipGenius I was
using; it apparently misses files with no extension in .7z files (at
least, it seems to with the ones from the rubyinstaller page.) I’ve
never seen that with any of the other archive formats it supports, and
its not a bug that I would have expected. Downloaded the 7-Zip
application itself, and, indeed, the scripts are there.
Glad to hear that I didn’t messed things up. Your comment forced me to
install 7zip on the office Mac just to verify I’m not crazy 
Please don’t hesitate in open new threads with your questions about
using it, but should be pretty straight forward:
-
Unpack
-
Add “bin” folder to the path (example):
SET PATH=%PATH%;C:\ruby-1.9.1-p129-i386-mingw32\bin -
Check ruby is working:
ruby -v
- Check rubygems is working:
gem env
- You’re good to go
Luis L. wrote:
Please don’t hesitate in open new threads with your questions about
using it, but should be pretty straight forward:
Unpack
Add “bin” folder to the path (example):
SET PATH=%PATH%;C:\ruby-1.9.1-p129-i386-mingw32\bin
2b) Add “.rb” and “.rbw” file extensions to the list of executable
files (example):
SET PATHEXT=%PATHEXT%;.rb;.rbw
2c) Associate the .rb and .rbw file extensions with the Ruby
interpreter (the easy way):
Double click on any .rb file and in the pop-up dialog select “Always
open files of this type with the following program” and navigate to
C:\ruby-1.9.1-p129-i386-mingw32\bin\ruby.exe (or whereever you keep
your Ruby installation).
Repeat for .rbw.
- Check ruby is working:
ruby -v
- Check rubygems is working:
gem env
- You’re good to go
Cheers,
jwm.
On Jun 13, 3:35 am, “Yugui (Yuki S.)” [email protected] wrote:
On 6/10/09 3:55 PM, Benjamin L. Russell wrote:
Are there any plans for a Ruby 1.9.1 One-Click Installer for Windows?
The current Ruby 1.8.6 One-Click Installer (seeYou can use arton’s MSI package.
*ActiveScriptRuby and Other packages
I’m not a english native speaker, even worse, I don’t speak or
understand japanese (or the language used to create those installers).
Wonder why none of these “distribution maintainers” wanted to join
forces to properly build a package for Windows and support it.
(there is no contact information in that link)
So, if arton read this: please contact me to luislavena at gmail dot
com.
Lot of effort has been invested on rubyinstaller repository to build
Ruby and the dependencies, also to build the installer packages. But
we definitely need more help 
On 6/10/09 3:55 PM, Benjamin L. Russell wrote:
Are there any plans for a Ruby 1.9.1 One-Click Installer for Windows?
The current Ruby 1.8.6 One-Click Installer (see
You can use arton’s MSI package.
– Yugui (Yuki S.) [email protected]
On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 01:35:27 -0500, “Yugui (Yuki S.)”
[email protected] wrote:
On 6/10/09 3:55 PM, Benjamin L. Russell wrote:
Are there any plans for a Ruby 1.9.1 One-Click Installer for Windows?
The current Ruby 1.8.6 One-Click Installer (seeYou can use arton’s MSI package.
Thank you! That was basically what I was looking for (except for fxri
and SciTE, which are are not included, but that’s fine for now).
(Note to other readers: The installer was worded in Japanese.
Although that is not a problem for me, since I can read Japanese, that
could be a problem for monolingual English speakers, who may
experience some difficulties in understanding the installer
instructions.)
– Benjamin L. Russell