From: Jason Roelofs <jameskilton@...>
Date: 2006-10-26T04:05:40+09:00
Subject: Re: A Rake executable script, is this the correct approach

------=_Part_26264_26117094.1161803136111
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Well, attempt 1 is merely defining the task, the task then has to be run,
which is what's happening in Attempt 2.

When you type `rake` in the command line, what you are really doing is

rake default

Hopefully that explains what's going on.

Jason

On 10/25/06, John Pywtorak <jpywtora@calpoly.edu> wrote:
>
> I humbly come to you, because searching, mostly google, has failed to
> produce a reference, or someone who has done this.
>
> We traditionally run Rakefile's using either
> $ rake
> or
> $ rake -f my.rake
> etc
>
> what if I wanted an executable script, say myscript, which is really a
> rake task file, but runs as though it where run as above.
> Attempt 1
> #!/usr/bin/env rake
> task :default do puts "Hello, Rake!" end
> FAILED
>
> Attempt 2
> #!/usr/bin/env ruby
> task :default do puts "Hello, Rake!" end
> Rake::Task[:default].invoke
> SUCCESS
>
> So, is the latter really the best way?  While it works I worry that rake
> is somehow not setup the same way if the this had been run the
> traditional way.  Thanks
>
> --
> Windows
> Start Here
> Frustrating Hanging Crashing
> Blue Screen of Death
> Reboot
>
>
>
>
>

------=_Part_26264_26117094.1161803136111--