I currently have Ruby 1.8.5. After much discussion on another thread about whether to upgrade to 1.8.7 and decided to go with 1.8.6 instead due to chatter about potential 1.8.7 potential compatibility issues. So to install 1.8.6, I grabbed the ruby-1.8.6-p368.zip off Ruby site. Upon unzipping it, I discovered that it doesn't contain any Windows binaries, so it appears that if I want this release, I need to build it (which I have no clue how to do at this point). The only release I can find with Windows binaries is ruby-1.8.6-p287-i386-mswin32.zip. I know I could use the one-click install which has P287 but it includes an older gem version than the one I already installed on my system. So my options are: 1) overwrite my current Ruby binaries with what's in p287 zip file 2) find the Windows libraries for p368 and use that instead, anyone know where I can grab these? Also, is it crucial to have p368 instead of p287? Thanks in advance for your help.
on 2009-05-09 01:56
on 2009-05-09 05:29
> The only release I can find with Windows binaries is > ruby-1.8.6-p287-i386-mswin32.zip. I know I could use the one-click > install which has P287 but it includes an older gem version than the one > I already installed on my system. you could still use it--just run gem update --system after you install it :) Other than that, you'll need to compile your own ruby for other versions, or use the (beta) mingw version. Instructions here: http://programming-gone-awry.blogspot.com/2009/05/... GL. -=r > So my options are: > 1) overwrite my current Ruby binaries with what's in p287 zip file > 2) find the Windows libraries for p368 and use that instead, anyone know > where I can grab these? > > Also, is it crucial to have p368 instead of p287? Thanks in advance for > your help. both probably safe. -=r
on 2009-05-09 11:05
Hi Cali, if you do not need to use the installer, you can have several ruby installations on your PC at the same time. Just unzip the package and put it somewhere. In cmd.exe do SET PATH=F:\myruby\bin;%PATH to put the ruby binary into PATH. That's all. When you need to run ruby scripts by double clicking on them you need to set this path system wide or user wide in windows controls / system. Or you just type explorer in cmd.exe, which then inherits the environment of your current cmd.exe. When I remember right, the zips may come without rubygems or with an old versions of rubygems (depends on the ruby version). Then just download the latest rubygems zipfile, unzip it and run the setup script. Then you can install gems. So you can easily switch ruby versions. The ruby binary knows where it actually lives and uses all the directories, which belongs to its setup automatically without any setup in registry etc. So just using the full path to the ruby.exe is enough to choose the ruby version you want. This is interesting, when you eg. want to run a mongrel as a service in windows. In cmd.exe it is better to modify PATH, so you it will be enough to just type ruby.exe. It even works on UNC-paths over a network. Only cmd.exe does not allow a cd to an unc-path. I therefor prefer 4nt over cmd.exe. Handling open source apps this way works for a huge number of software like perl, python, ruby, php, apache, mysql, postgresql, sqlite, gimp, inkscape etc. I have about 100 different packages on my PC installed this way and I am working with many of them at work every day since many years. So my conclusion is: Installers sucks - they really do, since they dramatically limit your choices. But this does not work with all software. Most commercial software is limited to installers. If you need more Information just ask or better send me an email. I have some experience on running those apps on windows and if you are a command line junky like me, for 4NT I even have a set of startup scripts, which makes those things even more easier. Regards Thomas
on 2009-05-09 19:21
@Roger thanks for the tip, wasn't aware of mingw but I'll check it out. @Thomas, sounds like you have amassed a good number of usable scripts, ever thought of making them available on a site like sourceforge as a open source project? I think a lot of developers can benefit from them, just a thought.