From: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" Date: 2007-04-09T23:11:32+09:00 Subject: Re: Minimum ruby installation. Rick DeNatale wrote: > On 4/8/07, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote: > >> >> 1. The "miniruby" executable is left behind in the build directory but >> apparently it isn't installed anywhere. >> 2. It is (on Linux, anyhow) an executable. >> >> $ file miniruby >> miniruby: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), for >> GNU/Linux 2.6.9, dynamically linked (uses shared libs), not stripped >> >> 3. It can at least do this: >> >> $ ./miniruby -e 'puts "Hello, world!"' >> Hello, world! >> >> So there you have it. What *else* miniruby can do I can't tell you. But >> it's there after a build and apparently *not* installed. > > It's a build tool, which is why it's not installed. It's used to > bootstrap building the real ruby since some of the installation tools > like instruby.rb, and extmk.rb are written in Ruby so a minimal ruby > is needed to install ruby! > > What it can and can't do is a little mysterious, and appears to be > platform dependent. > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.ruby.general/68084 In any event, I doubt if it will ever be something "supported for general use and widely useful", which is what I suspect the original poster wants. I haven't had much chance to fool around with Rubinius yet, but that looks to me like the way to get something like this -- most of Rubinius is written in "the real Ruby" and should be capable of making a micro Ruby interpreter. -- M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, FBG, AB, PTA, PGS, MS, MNLP, NST, ACMC(P) http://borasky-research.net/ If God had meant for carrots to be eaten cooked, He would have given rabbits fire.