From: Curt Hibbs <ml.chibbs@...>
Date: 2006-08-29T01:38:26+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby 1.8.5 released

On 8/28/06, Stephen Kellett <snail@objmedia.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >On 8/25/06, mortench <mortench@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Great! I can't wait for the Windows Installer version of Ruby 1.8.5
> >> (which will hopefully for a change be compiled with a recent MS
> >> compiler such as MSVC++ 20005) :-)
>
> I hope not. Visual Studio 8.0 has introduced all sorts of stupidities to
> the C/C++ world which should have stayed confined to the .NET world.
>
> Stupidities like manifests and the inability to do
> LoadLibrary("MSVCR80.DLL") for similar reasons.
>
> I often build trivial apps for testing purposes and sometimes deploy
> them to others computers. Not a problem with VC 6.0,7.0,7.1. Can't do it
> with 8.0 - complains about missing manifests and all manner of things.
> Can't find any documentation about it. I guess I should buy a $600
> Windows Installer based installer so that I can deploy my trivial app
> internally in the company (*). Simpler to stick with VC 6.0 and just
> copy the two files required across the network.
>
> Keep it simple, use VC 6.0, 7.0 or 7.1.
>
> Stephen
>
> (*) I did do this 5 years ago only to find that on most Windows NT 4.0
> computers (in the UK at least) the MSI installer would fail and no patch
> from MS would fix it. Solution: Use a non "Windows Installer" installer.

I can tell you for a fact that 1.8.5 version of the One-Click
installer will still be VC++6 -- there is no time for migrating to a
new build system.

Beyond that, a decision has yet to be made on whether the OCI will
change to MinGW or VC++8. There was a long thread here on ruby-talk a
month or so ago where I asked people to post their thoughts on the
pros and cons of each choice. A lot of good information was posted,
but I haven't yet had time to analyze it (and there are still some
talks with Microsoft that haven't yet happened). My feeling is that
the arguments are leaning towards MinGW, but its not at all clear cut.

Thanks Stephen, for your input below. I don't recall those facts
coming out in the previous thread so I will add your comments in to
the mix.

Curt