From: Curt Hibbs <curt@...>
Date: 2004-07-22T22:40:05+09:00
Subject: Re: [ANN] Ruby Installer for Windows 1.8.2-14_RC5 (from Ruby 1.8.2 preview1)

Lothar Scholz wrote:
>
> Hello Curt,
>
> CH> A public debate over what should or should not be included
> has occurred
> CH> several times in the past. As you might expect everyone has their own
> CH> favorites. I'm sure that a very good case could be made for
> each possible
> CH> inclusion, but it is simply not practical to include too many
> things, and
> CH> its not possible satisfy everyone.
>
> CH> The way I want to address this problem is to include RubyGems in the
> CH> installer, and then encourage package authors to release
> their packages in
> CH> RubyGems format. Then getting ruby-postgres installed on your
> system would
> CH> be as simple as running the command "gem install ruby-postgres".
>
> But this does still not help on binary extensions. And until the
> brain dead (assuming the build system for extensions is the same as
> the one for the original interpreter) and completely undocumented binary
> build system "rb_configure.rb" etc. is changed this is a very
> serious issue.
>
> My personal request here is to include "wxruby.0.4"

RubyGems *does* support platform-specific binary gems. This was an issue
that I brought up early on with the RubyGems developers precisely because I
wanted to package up wxRuby as a set of platform-specific binary gems
(although that hasn't happened yet). Do you think that wxRuby is mature
enough?

Curt

PS
  I still need to resolve your problem with TCL/TK extension. I sent you a
private email to your [mailinglists at scriptolutions dot com] address about
this, but perhaps it got spam-filtered into oblivion. After the postings
from you and [nobu.nokada at softhome dot net], it was not obvious to me
what the correct solution should be. If you could send me your email address
(send to curt at hibbs dot com), I will re-send you that email.
Thanks, -curt