# Ruby/Tk and MacOS X framework **URL:** \ **Category:** Ruby\ **Created:** [November 29, 2005, 4:21am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-tk-and-macos-x-framework/49039 "2005-11-29T04:21:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![nagai](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/n/c68b51/32.png) [@nagai](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/nagai)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 4:21am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-tk-and-macos-x-framework/49039/1 "2005-11-29T04:21:33Z")
Hi, I want to ask one question to MacOS X users. When --with-tcltk-framework configure option is given, current (1.8.4 and 1.9) ‘ext/tk/extconf.rb’ searches Tcl.framework and Tk.framework from “/Library/Frameworks” at first, and next searchs from “/System/Library/Frameworks”. My question is “Is the order proper? Or should it be in reverse?”. I need comments from MacOS X users. ---
**Author:** ![nagai](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/n/c68b51/32.png) [@nagai](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/nagai)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2005, 4:25am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-tk-and-macos-x-framework/49039/2 "2005-11-29T04:25:35Z")
On Nov 28, 2005, at 9:18 PM, Hidetoshi NAGAI wrote: > I need comments from MacOS X users. > /System/… is the location of Apple’s version, on the latest OS > (Tiger). User’s could install in /Library/… or even ~/Library/…, > so I think your order is probably okay. James Edward G. II ---
**Author:** ![nagai](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/n/c68b51/32.png) [@nagai](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/nagai)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 3:14am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-tk-and-macos-x-framework/49039/3 "2005-12-01T03:14:14Z")
From: James Edward G. II [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) Subject: Re: Ruby/Tk and MacOS X framework Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 12:24:47 +0900 Message-ID: [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) > /System/… is the location of Apple’s version, on the latest OS > (Tiger). User’s could install in /Library/… or even ~/Library/…, > so I think your order is probably okay. Thank you. I’ll keep the order. I have one more question. Should I add a new path and use the following search order? [ “/Library/Frameworks”, “/Network/Library/Frameworks”, # \<=== the new path “/System/Library/Frameworks” ] # I think that I should not add “~/Library/Frameworks”. # Is the judgement right? ---
**Author:** ![nagai](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/n/c68b51/32.png) [@nagai](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/nagai)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 3:04pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-tk-and-macos-x-framework/49039/4 "2005-12-01T15:04:05Z")
On Nov 30, 2005, at 8:12 PM, Hidetoshi NAGAI wrote: > “/Network/Library/Frameworks”, # \<=== the new path Hmm, I wasn’t aware of this alias until you pointed it out. I’ll let someone with more knowledge of its purpose answer that. > # I think that I should not add “~/Library/Frameworks”. > > # Is the judgement right? Well, it is a legal place to install. The OS itself would check it… James Edward G. II ---
**Author:** ![nagai](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/n/c68b51/32.png) [@nagai](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/nagai)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 8:35am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-tk-and-macos-x-framework/49039/5 "2005-12-02T08:35:56Z")
From: James Edward G. II [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) Subject: Re: Ruby/Tk and MacOS X framework Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 23:00:36 +0900 Message-ID: [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) > > “/Network/Library/Frameworks”, # \<=== the new path > > Hmm, I wasn’t aware of this alias until you pointed it out. I’ll let > > someone with more knowledge of its purpose answer that. I found it in ‘configure’ script of Tcl/Tk Extension. If the path is standard and important, it’ll have to be added. So, I asked about it. > > # I think that I should not add “~/Library/Frameworks”. > > > > # Is the judgement right? > > Well, it is a legal place to install. The OS itself would check it… By default, I think, ‘configure’ should search general pathes except pathes under the home of a certain user. Because, if depends on a certain user’s home, the compiled binary may not work for other users. Don’t you think so? ---
**Author:** ![nagai](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/n/c68b51/32.png) [@nagai](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/nagai)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2005, 5:37pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-tk-and-macos-x-framework/49039/6 "2005-12-02T17:37:08Z")
On Dec 2, 2005, at 7:31, Hidetoshi NAGAI wrote: > ## may not work for other users. Don’t you think so? > > Hidetoshi NAGAI (removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid) ~/Library/Frameworks is there for users who don’t have the administrative powers to install to /Library/Frameworks, so it’s a good place to check. Presumably the user would also be installing Ruby within their own space as well, so I’m not sure that the binary not working for other users would be particularly important in that case. matthew smillie. ---
**Author:** ![nagai](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/n/c68b51/32.png) [@nagai](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/nagai)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2005, 8:20am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-tk-and-macos-x-framework/49039/7 "2005-12-03T08:20:59Z")
From: Matthew S. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) Subject: Re: Ruby/Tk and MacOS X framework Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 01:34:30 +0900 Message-ID: [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) > ~/Library/Frameworks is there for users who don’t have the > administrative powers to install to /Library/Frameworks, so it’s a > good place to check. Presumably the user would also be installing > Ruby within their own space as well, so I’m not sure that the binary > not working for other users would be particularly important in that > case. Hmm… In such case, the user will give the configure option about the install directory of the binaries. And then, it is not difficult to give the option about the framework directory. If the installed binaries work for only the user who install them, I think that is a larger problem.