From: Curt Hibbs <curt.hibbs@...>
Date: 2005-10-20T23:33:43+09:00
Subject: Re: Killing Threads & Processes on Windows

------=_Part_3587_2839135.1129818819507
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Just to add my voice...

I produce the One-Click Ruby Installer for Windows. I also consider Win98 a
dead platform, especially for developers. I do not test the one-click
installer on Win98, so it may or may not work there.

Curt

On 10/20/05, daz <dooby@d10.karoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> Nobu wrote:
> > Berger, Daniel wrote in [ruby-talk:161437]:
> > > Probably. I consider Win9x a dead platform, so I don't
> > > worry myself with it. :)
> >
> > Actually, we already had buried it as a development platform,
> > but still I'm uncertain if it is dead also as an end-user
> > platform.
>
>
> Dilemma: Win95 is dead. Win9x is not.
>
> Very many 98se (and, presumably ME) DLLs are NT versions
> due to the convergence between Win98+ and Win2K towards XP.
>
> So there's some software around where the author has used
> the NT API and reports have been sent that it doesn't run
> on 9x (they mean 95) - but it *does* run on 98+.
>
> I've seen a few sites which say their s/w will not run on
> 98, but may run on 98se.
>
> *Very* rarely, I see (for example) "XP+ only".
> Developers must have to work really hard to make a program
> which only runs on XP+.
>
> In summary, I don't often find s/w that won't run on 98se.
>
>
> >
> > And usa was worried that nobody would test for Win9x, if we
> > divide it.
> >
>
> Since the majority of Windows users are "one-clickers"
> and there are no "one-click" stable previews OR development
> versions (yet?), incompatibilities will only show up when
> it's too late.
>
> I know usa provides stable & dev. at:
> http://www.garbagecollect.jp/ruby/mswin32/en/
> (linked from http://www.ruby-lang.org downloads)
>
>
> ----
>
> The incompatibilies I find in Ruby all seem to come from
> the use of the command line changes (such as that >&2
> redirection thingy?) in Makefiles or in scripts using
> backtick/system etc. (i.e. command.com <http://command.com> vs. cmd.exe).
> Those can often be worked around (?)
>
> Not a huge problem, IMHO.
>
> If you want to kill 9x, the "one-click" installer must be
> advertised as "2K/XP only" and it must refuse to install.
>
> System requirements should also be advertised on ruby-lang.
>
> Then potential users will go off to the "P"-language
> websites and find that they do run on 9x - even 95.
>
>
> daz
>
>
>
>
>

------=_Part_3587_2839135.1129818819507--