|
Replies:
21
-
Last Post:
Nov 1, 2007 12:44 PM
by: psriniva
|
|
|
Posts:
159
From:
Menlo Park, CA, USA
Registered:
4/17/06
|
|
|
|
Ruby/Rails components -
Posted:
Sep 13, 2007 8:15 PM
|
|
Hello Webstackers,
Here are Ruby/Rails components for inclusion, and brief notes on what
the component is(or why it is included). The items that are included
should make for a basic Ruby/Rails installation. "Basic" being defined
as the components required to build, and conveniently use a Ruby On
Rails stack.
The other pieces defined as basic, but not a part of the core Ruby
build, include gems, the Ruby package management system, Mongrel, which
is a Ruby based HTTP server that is a good fit for easy deployment of
Rails applications, and RedCloth, which is needed to be able to
successfully complete a Rails tutorial on the rails web site. The FCGI
connector for Ruby is included. We'd need the adapter on the Apache
side to be bundled with the AMP stack, as well, for this to be more useful.
As far as native extensions are concerned, readline is, to use an
oxymoron, a "core extension". curses, ncurses, and openssl extensions
can be obtained for free, since they are already available in Nevada.
The doors extension, and the kstat extension, exist, but the former, in
my opinion, is too new(a month old?). And the latter appears immature
on x86(also not a complete extension). If anyone feels that they are
still worth including, do let me know.
Mechanize, and gdbm are on TBD list, since we don't know yet if these
are popular enough.
The list:
Major components:
------------------------
-> Ruby 1.8.6 patchupdate 5000 (GPL)
The Ruby Binary.
-> Rails 1.2.3 (MIT License)
Rails and constituent libraries without which it cannot be called Rails.
Other Important Ruby Programs/Libraries(both concomitant and ones
explicitly included into this stack):
-----------------------------------------------------
-> erb - part of Ruby distribution.
Interpretor for Ruby embedded in, say HTML files.
-> irb - part of Ruby distribution.
Interactive Ruby Shell
-> testrb - part of Ruby distribution
Used to run tests/test suites.
-> rake - dependency for rails.
Ruby build tool.
-> ri - part of Ruby distribution
Ruby documentation viewer
-> rdoc - part of Ruby distribution
Used to generate documentation from Ruby programs.
-> gem 0.9.0 - explicitly included.
Ruby package manager.
-> Mongrel 1.0.1 - explicitly included
(Ruby HTTP web server that affords easy development/deployment). (GPL)
-> Ruby-fcgi package 0.8.7
(for web server support like Apache/Lighty etc.,) (GPL) [FastCGI 2.4.0
is a dependency for this package]
-> RedCloth 3.0.4
(Textile parsing library - need this for starter tutorial on
rubyonrails.org to work). (BSD)
Extensions
-> readline 5.2 (basic console support for Ruby and Rails) (Native GNU
readline, released under the GPL, is needed).
-> OpenSSL support - use version in Solaris. (get this for free by
linking with /usr/sfw openssl).
-> Curses - use version in Nevada.
-> TK - use version in Nevada.
-> ncurses - use version in Nevada.
TBD, and the "Rather not include at this time" dependencies:
-> Mechanize (port of Perl's mechanize - a Ruby library to help script
HTTP/S interactions)
-> Kstat extension(doesn't work well enough)
-> GDBM
-> doors(too new)
Regards,
-ps
_______________________________________________
webstack-discuss mailing list
webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
|
|
|
Brandorr
brandorr@opensolaris...
|
|
|
|
Re: Ruby/Rails components -
Posted:
Sep 14, 2007 12:44 PM
in response to: psriniva
|
|
It seems like a good list. Any thoughts on Nginx and lighttpd?
On 9/13/07, Prashant Srinivasan <Prashant dot Srinivasan at sun dot com> wrote:
> Hello Webstackers,
>
> Here are Ruby/Rails components for inclusion, and brief notes on what
> the component is(or why it is included). The items that are included
> should make for a basic Ruby/Rails installation. "Basic" being defined
> as the components required to build, and conveniently use a Ruby On
> Rails stack.
>
> The other pieces defined as basic, but not a part of the core Ruby
> build, include gems, the Ruby package management system, Mongrel, which
> is a Ruby based HTTP server that is a good fit for easy deployment of
> Rails applications, and RedCloth, which is needed to be able to
> successfully complete a Rails tutorial on the rails web site. The FCGI
> connector for Ruby is included. We'd need the adapter on the Apache
> side to be bundled with the AMP stack, as well, for this to be more useful.
>
> As far as native extensions are concerned, readline is, to use an
> oxymoron, a "core extension". curses, ncurses, and openssl extensions
> can be obtained for free, since they are already available in Nevada.
>
> The doors extension, and the kstat extension, exist, but the former, in
> my opinion, is too new(a month old?). And the latter appears immature
> on x86(also not a complete extension). If anyone feels that they are
> still worth including, do let me know.
>
> Mechanize, and gdbm are on TBD list, since we don't know yet if these
> are popular enough.
>
> The list:
>
> Major components:
> ------------------------
> -> Ruby 1.8.6 patchupdate 5000 (GPL)
> The Ruby Binary.
>
> -> Rails 1.2.3 (MIT License)
> Rails and constituent libraries without which it cannot be called Rails.
>
> Other Important Ruby Programs/Libraries(both concomitant and ones
> explicitly included into this stack):
> -----------------------------------------------------
> -> erb - part of Ruby distribution.
> Interpretor for Ruby embedded in, say HTML files.
>
> -> irb - part of Ruby distribution.
> Interactive Ruby Shell
>
> -> testrb - part of Ruby distribution
> Used to run tests/test suites.
>
> -> rake - dependency for rails.
> Ruby build tool.
>
> -> ri - part of Ruby distribution
> Ruby documentation viewer
>
>
> -> rdoc - part of Ruby distribution
> Used to generate documentation from Ruby programs.
>
> -> gem 0.9.0 - explicitly included.
> Ruby package manager.
>
> -> Mongrel 1.0.1 - explicitly included
> (Ruby HTTP web server that affords easy development/deployment). (GPL)
>
> -> Ruby-fcgi package 0.8.7
> (for web server support like Apache/Lighty etc.,) (GPL) [FastCGI 2.4.0
> is a dependency for this package]
>
> -> RedCloth 3.0.4
> (Textile parsing library - need this for starter tutorial on
> rubyonrails.org to work). (BSD)
>
> Extensions
> -> readline 5.2 (basic console support for Ruby and Rails) (Native GNU
> readline, released under the GPL, is needed).
> -> OpenSSL support - use version in Solaris. (get this for free by
> linking with /usr/sfw openssl).
> -> Curses - use version in Nevada.
> -> TK - use version in Nevada.
> -> ncurses - use version in Nevada.
>
> TBD, and the "Rather not include at this time" dependencies:
> -> Mechanize (port of Perl's mechanize - a Ruby library to help script
> HTTP/S interactions)
> -> Kstat extension(doesn't work well enough)
> -> GDBM
> -> doors(too new)
>
> Regards,
> -ps
> _______________________________________________
> webstack-discuss mailing list
> webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
>
--
- Brian Gupta
http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/
_______________________________________________
webstack-discuss mailing list
webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
159
From:
Menlo Park, CA, USA
Registered:
4/17/06
|
|
|
|
Re: Ruby/Rails components -
Posted:
Sep 15, 2007 12:00 PM
in response to: Brandorr
|
|
Nginx is popular at deployment time, as a front end for rails servers,
rather than a rails container, isn't it? It does have fcgi support, and
seems event port integrated, and quite popular
(http://googleonlinesecurity.blogspot.com/2007/06/web-server-software-and-malware.html),
encompassing 4% of HTTP servers on the internet.
Lighty, of course, is used for both web server and rails container, and
is fast gaining popularity(Per recent netstat ratings, which I don't
immediately have a pointer to).
Question is, how much choice do we want to build into the stack? Are
we focussing exclusively on development environments?
How do others on this list think about this?
Thanks,
-ps
Brandorr wrote:
> It seems like a good list. Any thoughts on Nginx and lighttpd?
>
> On 9/13/07, Prashant Srinivasan <Prashant dot Srinivasan at sun dot com> wrote:
>
>> Hello Webstackers,
>>
>> Here are Ruby/Rails components for inclusion, and brief notes on what
>> the component is(or why it is included). The items that are included
>> should make for a basic Ruby/Rails installation. "Basic" being defined
>> as the components required to build, and conveniently use a Ruby On
>> Rails stack.
>>
>> The other pieces defined as basic, but not a part of the core Ruby
>> build, include gems, the Ruby package management system, Mongrel, which
>> is a Ruby based HTTP server that is a good fit for easy deployment of
>> Rails applications, and RedCloth, which is needed to be able to
>> successfully complete a Rails tutorial on the rails web site. The FCGI
>> connector for Ruby is included. We'd need the adapter on the Apache
>> side to be bundled with the AMP stack, as well, for this to be more useful.
>>
>> As far as native extensions are concerned, readline is, to use an
>> oxymoron, a "core extension". curses, ncurses, and openssl extensions
>> can be obtained for free, since they are already available in Nevada.
>>
>> The doors extension, and the kstat extension, exist, but the former, in
>> my opinion, is too new(a month old?). And the latter appears immature
>> on x86(also not a complete extension). If anyone feels that they are
>> still worth including, do let me know.
>>
>> Mechanize, and gdbm are on TBD list, since we don't know yet if these
>> are popular enough.
>>
>> The list:
>>
>> Major components:
>> ------------------------
>> -> Ruby 1.8.6 patchupdate 5000 (GPL)
>> The Ruby Binary.
>>
>> -> Rails 1.2.3 (MIT License)
>> Rails and constituent libraries without which it cannot be called Rails.
>>
>> Other Important Ruby Programs/Libraries(both concomitant and ones
>> explicitly included into this stack):
>> -----------------------------------------------------
>> -> erb - part of Ruby distribution.
>> Interpretor for Ruby embedded in, say HTML files.
>>
>> -> irb - part of Ruby distribution.
>> Interactive Ruby Shell
>>
>> -> testrb - part of Ruby distribution
>> Used to run tests/test suites.
>>
>> -> rake - dependency for rails.
>> Ruby build tool.
>>
>> -> ri - part of Ruby distribution
>> Ruby documentation viewer
>>
>>
>> -> rdoc - part of Ruby distribution
>> Used to generate documentation from Ruby programs.
>>
>> -> gem 0.9.0 - explicitly included.
>> Ruby package manager.
>>
>> -> Mongrel 1.0.1 - explicitly included
>> (Ruby HTTP web server that affords easy development/deployment). (GPL)
>>
>> -> Ruby-fcgi package 0.8.7
>> (for web server support like Apache/Lighty etc.,) (GPL) [FastCGI 2.4.0
>> is a dependency for this package]
>>
>> -> RedCloth 3.0.4
>> (Textile parsing library - need this for starter tutorial on
>> rubyonrails.org to work). (BSD)
>>
>> Extensions
>> -> readline 5.2 (basic console support for Ruby and Rails) (Native GNU
>> readline, released under the GPL, is needed).
>> -> OpenSSL support - use version in Solaris. (get this for free by
>> linking with /usr/sfw openssl).
>> -> Curses - use version in Nevada.
>> -> TK - use version in Nevada.
>> -> ncurses - use version in Nevada.
>>
>> TBD, and the "Rather not include at this time" dependencies:
>> -> Mechanize (port of Perl's mechanize - a Ruby library to help script
>> HTTP/S interactions)
>> -> Kstat extension(doesn't work well enough)
>> -> GDBM
>> -> doors(too new)
>>
>> Regards,
>> -ps
>> _______________________________________________
>> webstack-discuss mailing list
>> webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
>>
>>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
webstack-discuss mailing list
webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
215
From:
US
Registered:
5/12/06
|
|
|
|
Re: Ruby/Rails components -
Posted:
Sep 15, 2007 12:41 PM
in response to: psriniva
|
|
Prashant Srinivasan wrote:
(snip...)
>
>
> Question is, how much choice do we want to build into the stack? Are
> we focussing exclusively on development environments?
>
Personally, for the majority of users (and that's not to say large or
enterprise deployments), they'll want to deploy on the same bits they
develop on if the capability is there. In our long-ago past we did
'desktop' and 'server' versions of OS consolidations-- it doesn't make
sense to revisit those days. One stack that has the appropriate
attributes for both development/deployment is possible and preferable in
my opinion. Just as OpenSolaris has stuff for desktops and servers, the
web stack should be for development and production, if you ask me.
> How do others on this list think about this?
>
> Brandorr wrote:
>
>> It seems like a good list. Any thoughts on Nginx and lighttpd?
In the long term (which may be just 6 months out), I think we should
consider either or both of them in the stack personally.
Like I've expressed before, most users are just looking for packaging in
their OS distribution, so from that perspective, there will be those who
decide upon lighttpd or nginx and we'd love to have as many web stack
users as possible on OpenSolaris, whether it's Solaris + AMP, Solaris +
lighttpd/mongrel/RoR, Solaris + nginx/apache2/mod_php/postgresql, etc.
In fact, it was this kind of thought exactly that prompted me to post a
comment regarding software clusters to Stephen Hahn's latest (excellent)
blog on packaging [1]. This is definitely a little different than other
consolidations in OpenSolaris, where there's a lot of thought put into
adding something since it may need to be there for a very long time.
Let's walk before we run though-- get a good, solid, out of the box
experience with a complete set of common extensions into Nevada. Then
we can think about other components.
Shanti has already blogged on building lighttpd[2]. Once PHP and Ruby
hit Nevada, perhaps we we can assemble some blogs to help those who want
to build on top of the web stack in Nevada. It's not the same OOB
experience, but it'll make things easier for those kicking the tires on
OpenSolaris.
Longer term, if someone wants to pick up the work of integrating
lighttpd/nginx (either a Sun engineer or a community member), that would
be great in my opinion.
- Matt
[1] http://blogs.sun.com/sch/entry/pkg_1_a_no_scripting#comments
[2] http://blogs.sun.com/shanti/entry/lighttpd_on_solaris
--
Matt Ingenthron - Web Infrastructure Solutions Architect
Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Global Systems Practice
http://blogs.sun.com/mingenthron/
email: matt dot ingenthron at sun dot com Phone: 310-242-6439
_______________________________________________
webstack-discuss mailing list
webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Brandorr
brandorr@opensolaris...
|
|
|
|
Re: Ruby/Rails components -
Posted:
Sep 15, 2007 1:02 PM
in response to: ingenthr
|
|
I polled my local RoR UG and the lack of webserver choice regarding
your proposed components was the main comment/complaint.
Depending upon what the costs are to do it up front, I feel that it
may be worth pushing back the stack delivery by a few weeks rather
than postponing 6 months+. (6 months is a really long time these
days).
-Brian
On 9/15/07, Matt Ingenthron <Matt dot Ingenthron at sun dot com> wrote:
> Prashant Srinivasan wrote:
>
> (snip...)
> >
> >
> > Question is, how much choice do we want to build into the stack? Are
> > we focussing exclusively on development environments?
> >
>
> Personally, for the majority of users (and that's not to say large or
> enterprise deployments), they'll want to deploy on the same bits they
> develop on if the capability is there. In our long-ago past we did
> 'desktop' and 'server' versions of OS consolidations-- it doesn't make
> sense to revisit those days. One stack that has the appropriate
> attributes for both development/deployment is possible and preferable in
> my opinion. Just as OpenSolaris has stuff for desktops and servers, the
> web stack should be for development and production, if you ask me.
>
> > How do others on this list think about this?
> >
> > Brandorr wrote:
> >
> >> It seems like a good list. Any thoughts on Nginx and lighttpd?
>
> In the long term (which may be just 6 months out), I think we should
> consider either or both of them in the stack personally.
>
> Like I've expressed before, most users are just looking for packaging in
> their OS distribution, so from that perspective, there will be those who
> decide upon lighttpd or nginx and we'd love to have as many web stack
> users as possible on OpenSolaris, whether it's Solaris + AMP, Solaris +
> lighttpd/mongrel/RoR, Solaris + nginx/apache2/mod_php/postgresql, etc.
> In fact, it was this kind of thought exactly that prompted me to post a
> comment regarding software clusters to Stephen Hahn's latest (excellent)
> blog on packaging [1]. This is definitely a little different than other
> consolidations in OpenSolaris, where there's a lot of thought put into
> adding something since it may need to be there for a very long time.
>
> Let's walk before we run though-- get a good, solid, out of the box
> experience with a complete set of common extensions into Nevada. Then
> we can think about other components.
>
> Shanti has already blogged on building lighttpd[2]. Once PHP and Ruby
> hit Nevada, perhaps we we can assemble some blogs to help those who want
> to build on top of the web stack in Nevada. It's not the same OOB
> experience, but it'll make things easier for those kicking the tires on
> OpenSolaris.
>
> Longer term, if someone wants to pick up the work of integrating
> lighttpd/nginx (either a Sun engineer or a community member), that would
> be great in my opinion.
>
> - Matt
>
> [1] http://blogs.sun.com/sch/entry/pkg_1_a_no_scripting#comments
> [2] http://blogs.sun.com/shanti/entry/lighttpd_on_solaris
>
> --
> Matt Ingenthron - Web Infrastructure Solutions Architect
> Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Global Systems Practice
> http://blogs.sun.com/mingenthron/
> email: matt dot ingenthron at sun dot com Phone: 310-242-6439
>
>
--
- Brian Gupta
http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/
_______________________________________________
webstack-discuss mailing list
webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
215
From:
US
Registered:
5/12/06
|
|
|
|
Re: Ruby/Rails components -
Posted:
Sep 15, 2007 11:56 PM
in response to: Brandorr
|
|
Brandorr wrote:
> I polled my local RoR UG and the lack of webserver choice regarding
> your proposed components was the main comment/complaint.
>
First of all, thanks much for polling the UG! That's great feedback.
Was there any consensus on which web server was most in use with this
RoR crowd?
> Depending upon what the costs are to do it up front, I feel that it
> may be worth pushing back the stack delivery by a few weeks rather
> than postponing 6 months+. (6 months is a really long time these
> days).
Since the Nevada project has a release train that's pretty much
scheduled[1], it's not so much a question of releasing a few weeks
later. If we want to be on the train that leaves and is turned into the
next SXDE, it'd be best to get things integrated prior to build 78, so
that's the target of most of the current effort and components.
Other stuff will definitely come in later builds, and will turn into
future builds of SXDE-- generally on a 4-6 month schedule.
The tradeoff here is that there may need to be effort expended elsewhere
to bring components up to date with the upstream if there are new
releases or security fixes required (which takes effort), or we may need
to add additional optional modules (see the PHP stuff in the list
archives) to be compatible with common apps and get to functional parity
with existing Cool Stack).
Having said all of that, I agree that if we're going to add other web
servers (which hasn't been determined yet), it'd be best to not wait 6
months. I also agree, 6 months is a long time, which is why I figured
it would be best to have directions/blogs on how to build lighttpd/nginx
if one wanted to.
Then again, that's all just my opinion, and we've not really laid
specific plans for after build 79. Thanks for the feedback though, and
it's good to start thinking about it.
- Matt
[1] http://opensolaris.org/os/community/on/onnv_schedule.txt
--
Matt Ingenthron - Web Infrastructure Solutions Architect
Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Global Systems Practice
http://blogs.sun.com/mingenthron/
email: matt dot ingenthron at sun dot com Phone: 310-242-6439
_______________________________________________
webstack-discuss mailing list
webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
716
From:
Registered:
7/13/07
|
|
|
|
Re: Ruby/Rails components -
Posted:
Oct 13, 2007 6:53 PM
in response to: ingenthr
|
|
Matt Ingenthron wrote:
>
>
> Having said all of that, I agree that if we're going to add other web
> servers (which hasn't been determined yet), it'd be best to not wait 6
> months. I also agree, 6 months is a long time, which is why I figured
> it would be best to have directions/blogs on how to build lighttpd/nginx
> if one wanted to.
>
> Then again, that's all just my opinion, and we've not really laid
> specific plans for after build 79. Thanks for the feedback though, and
> it's good to start thinking about it.
BTW I should point out that since this is opensolaris, if anyone wants
to work on hooking up their favorite component into sfw build and post
diffs, please do... While I have a very small number of people in my
immediate team, everyone is welcome to hook up their favorite code and
share the result.
Even just the diffs will be quite useful for others who want to play
with it. And while the process for full integration is unfortunately
fairly overwhelming (for now anyway) we can certainly help pursue it
if there's interest.
--
Jyri J. Virkki - jyri dot virkki at sun dot com - Sun Microsystems
_______________________________________________
webstack-discuss mailing list
webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
135
From:
GB
Registered:
5/25/07
|
|
|
|
Re: Ruby/Rails components -
Posted:
Sep 17, 2007 2:55 AM
in response to: ingenthr
|
|
Matt Ingenthron wrote:
> < snipage>
>
> Shanti has already blogged on building lighttpd[2]. Once PHP and Ruby
> hit Nevada, perhaps we we can assemble some blogs to help those who want
> to build on top of the web stack in Nevada. It's not the same OOB
> experience, but it'll make things easier for those kicking the tires on
> OpenSolaris.
>
> Longer term, if someone wants to pick up the work of integrating
> lighttpd/nginx (either a Sun engineer or a community member), that would
> be great in my opinion.
>
Shanti's work with Lighttpd has kicked of a lot of internal interest in
Lighttpd and because of this my group have taken on Lighttpd for
performance and scalability work including things like implementing
Solaris Event Ports. Given the experience that we now have with Lighttpd
we are well placed to do the integration work, I'd just need to work out
how best to approach it and how to fit the work into our process.
BTW: We've actually been campaigning to get Lighttpd integrated for some
time now
Amanda
> - Matt
>
> [1] http://blogs.sun.com/sch/entry/pkg_1_a_no_scripting#comments
> [2] http://blogs.sun.com/shanti/entry/lighttpd_on_solaris
>
>
--
Amanda Waite
ISV-Engineering OSS, Sun Microsystems
Tel: +44 (0)1252 420693
Mobile: +44 (0)7802 175732
_______________________________________________
webstack-discuss mailing list
webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
21
From:
Registered:
3/29/07
|
|
|
|
Re: Ruby/Rails components -
Posted:
Sep 14, 2007 1:00 PM
in response to: psriniva
|
|
Hi Prashant,
The rails site still lists ruby 1.8.5 as the required version. Do we
know if there are any issues with 1.8.6 and rails 1.2.3 ?
Shanti
Prashant Srinivasan wrote:
> Hello Webstackers,
>
> Here are Ruby/Rails components for inclusion, and brief notes on what
> the component is(or why it is included). The items that are included
> should make for a basic Ruby/Rails installation. "Basic" being defined
> as the components required to build, and conveniently use a Ruby On
> Rails stack.
>
> The other pieces defined as basic, but not a part of the core Ruby
> build, include gems, the Ruby package management system, Mongrel, which
> is a Ruby based HTTP server that is a good fit for easy deployment of
> Rails applications, and RedCloth, which is needed to be able to
> successfully complete a Rails tutorial on the rails web site. The FCGI
> connector for Ruby is included. We'd need the adapter on the Apache
> side to be bundled with the AMP stack, as well, for this to be more useful.
>
> As far as native extensions are concerned, readline is, to use an
> oxymoron, a "core extension". curses, ncurses, and openssl extensions
> can be obtained for free, since they are already available in Nevada.
>
> The doors extension, and the kstat extension, exist, but the former, in
> my opinion, is too new(a month old?). And the latter appears immature
> on x86(also not a complete extension). If anyone feels that they are
> still worth including, do let me know.
>
> Mechanize, and gdbm are on TBD list, since we don't know yet if these
> are popular enough.
>
> The list:
>
> Major components:
> ------------------------
> -> Ruby 1.8.6 patchupdate 5000 (GPL)
> The Ruby Binary.
>
> -> Rails 1.2.3 (MIT License)
> Rails and constituent libraries without which it cannot be called Rails.
>
> Other Important Ruby Programs/Libraries(both concomitant and ones
> explicitly included into this stack):
> -----------------------------------------------------
> -> erb - part of Ruby distribution.
> Interpretor for Ruby embedded in, say HTML files.
>
> -> irb - part of Ruby distribution.
> Interactive Ruby Shell
>
> -> testrb - part of Ruby distribution
> Used to run tests/test suites.
>
> -> rake - dependency for rails.
> Ruby build tool.
>
> -> ri - part of Ruby distribution
> Ruby documentation viewer
>
>
> -> rdoc - part of Ruby distribution
> Used to generate documentation from Ruby programs.
>
> -> gem 0.9.0 - explicitly included.
> Ruby package manager.
>
> -> Mongrel 1.0.1 - explicitly included
> (Ruby HTTP web server that affords easy development/deployment). (GPL)
>
> -> Ruby-fcgi package 0.8.7
> (for web server support like Apache/Lighty etc.,) (GPL) [FastCGI 2.4.0
> is a dependency for this package]
>
> -> RedCloth 3.0.4
> (Textile parsing library - need this for starter tutorial on
> rubyonrails.org to work). (BSD)
>
> Extensions
> -> readline 5.2 (basic console support for Ruby and Rails) (Native GNU
> readline, released under the GPL, is needed).
> -> OpenSSL support - use version in Solaris. (get this for free by
> linking with /usr/sfw openssl).
> -> Curses - use version in Nevada.
> -> TK - use version in Nevada.
> -> ncurses - use version in Nevada.
>
> TBD, and the "Rather not include at this time" dependencies:
> -> Mechanize (port of Perl's mechanize - a Ruby library to help script
> HTTP/S interactions)
> -> Kstat extension(doesn't work well enough)
> -> GDBM
> -> doors(too new)
>
> Regards,
> -ps
> _______________________________________________
> webstack-discuss mailing list
> webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
_______________________________________________
webstack-discuss mailing list
webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
159
From:
Menlo Park, CA, USA
Registered:
4/17/06
|
|
|
|
Re: Ruby/Rails components -
Posted:
Sep 15, 2007 12:01 PM
in response to: shanti_s
|
|
Shanti,
Rails 1.2.3 has been compatible with Ruby 1.8.6 since March. There
were issues in 1.2.2 which were fixed in 1.2.3.
http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2007/3/14/rails-1-2-3-compatible-with-ruby-1-8-6-and-other-fixes
http://mentalized.net/journal/2007/03/14/changes_in_rails_123/
The first url doesn't load correctly with my version of firefox on
sparc, I've inlined a partial page dump below.
-ps
Rails 1.2.3: Compatible with Ruby 1.8.6 (and other fixes)
Posted by David March 14, 2007 @ 12:27 AM
While
Rails Edge continues to move forward at a rapid clip, we've still had
the time to make sure that Rails 1.2.x stays in the game. This release
irons out the few wrinkles there was between Ruby 1.8.6 and Rails
1.2.2. So now you can enjoy the latest Ruby with the latest Rails.
Besides
the 1.8.6 compatibility, we've included a few minor fixes. Nothing
major. This should be a drop-in replacement for Rails 1.2.2.
As always, you can upgrade with gems or use the latest svn tag
(rel_1-2-3). Enjoy!
Posted in Releases | 45
comments
Comments
<small>Leave
a response</small>
Shanti Subramanyam - PAE wrote:
Hi
Prashant,
The rails site still lists ruby 1.8.5 as the required version. Do we
know if there are any issues with 1.8.6 and rails 1.2.3 ?
Major components:
------------------------
-> Ruby 1.8.6 patchupdate 5000 (GPL)
The Ruby Binary.
-> Rails 1.2.3 (MIT License)
Rails and constituent libraries without which it cannot be called
Rails.
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
962
From:
US
Registered:
3/9/05
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
262
From:
Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom
Registered:
5/2/06
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
159
From:
Menlo Park, CA, USA
Registered:
4/17/06
|
|
|
|
Re: Ruby/Rails components -
Posted:
Oct 14, 2007 11:57 PM
in response to: number9
|
|
****,
Thanks for bringing this up. We're hoping to get Ruby + rubygems in
the first round, but this should certainly get into our list of things.
It'd be very interesting in knowing more about Joyent's Ruby Dtrace
support.
(Also, is it already planned for inclusion in the Ruby trunk?)
And volunteers are also welcome to join/help this effort. Right now
it's rather minimally staffed.
-ps
**** Davies wrote:
> Sorry to come to this late, but I wondered whether there were any plans on integrating the DTraced Ruby 1.8.6 from http://joyeur.com/2007/05/07/dtrace-for-ruby-is-available ?
> This message posted from opensolaris.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> webstack-discuss mailing list
> webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
>
_______________________________________________
webstack-discuss mailing list
webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
10
From:
Berlin, Germany
Registered:
3/24/06
|
|
|
|
Re: Ruby/Rails components -
Posted:
Oct 18, 2007 11:49 AM
in response to: psriniva
To: Projects » webstack » discuss
|
|
Hi,
today, I received a request by a customer to migrate their application stack from linux to Solaris 10 U4.
The request looks like this:
ruby >= 1.8.5
rubygems >= 0.9.4
mysql-ruby >= 2.7.3
fastthread >= 1.0
rspec >= 1.0.5
log4r >= 1.0.5
activerecord >= 1.15.3
activesupport >= 1.4.2
mongrel >= 1.0.1
libgpg-error >= 1.5
libgcrypt >= 1.2.4
rake >= 0.7.3
Comparing this to the suggested webstack component list,
it seems not to be complete for a
real world customer application.
Hope this helps to improve the webstack project.
--
Thorleif Wiik
http://www.wiik.de
|
|
|
|
|
Brandorr
brandorr@opensolaris...
|
|
|
|
Re: Ruby/Rails components -
Posted:
Oct 18, 2007 11:58 AM
in response to: t.wiik
|
|
On 10/18/07, Thorleif Wiik <wiik at pixelpark dot com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> today, I received a request by a customer to migrate their application stack from linux to Solaris 10 U4.
>
> The request looks like this:
>
> ruby >= 1.8.5
> rubygems >= 0.9.4
> mysql-ruby >= 2.7.3
> fastthread >= 1.0
> rspec >= 1.0.5
> log4r >= 1.0.5
> activerecord >= 1.15.3
> activesupport >= 1.4.2
> mongrel >= 1.0.1
> libgpg-error >= 1.5
> libgcrypt >= 1.2.4
> rake >= 0.7.3
Thorleif,
Most, if not all, of these Ruby apps and libraries can be installed as
Gems. Could you check with your client, and verify that "gem install
rails" is what they are used to. (IE: rubygems will be included, but
not every single common library).
Cheers,
Brian
P.S. - I am not on the integration team, so please take my comments
with a grain of salt.
> Comparing this to the suggested webstack component list,
> it seems not to be complete for a
> real world customer application.
>
>
> Hope this helps to improve the webstack project.
>
>
> --
> Thorleif Wiik
> http://www.wiik.de
> This message posted from opensolaris.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> webstack-discuss mailing list
> webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
>
--
- Brian Gupta
http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/
_______________________________________________
webstack-discuss mailing list
webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
159
From:
Menlo Park, CA, USA
Registered:
4/17/06
|
|
|
|
Re: Ruby/Rails components -
Posted:
Oct 18, 2007 2:05 PM
in response to: Brandorr
|
|
Brandorr wrote:
> On 10/18/07, Thorleif Wiik <wiik at pixelpark dot com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> today, I received a request by a customer to migrate their application stack from linux to Solaris 10 U4.
>>
>> The request looks like this:
>>
>> ruby >= 1.8.5
>> rubygems >= 0.9.4
>> mysql-ruby >= 2.7.3
>> fastthread >= 1.0
>> rspec >= 1.0.5
>> log4r >= 1.0.5
>> activerecord >= 1.15.3
>> activesupport >= 1.4.2
>> mongrel >= 1.0.1
>> libgpg-error >= 1.5
>> libgcrypt >= 1.2.4
>> rake >= 0.7.3
>>
>
> Thorleif,
>
> Most, if not all, of these Ruby apps and libraries can be installed as
> Gems. Could you check with your client, and verify that "gem install
> rails" is what they are used to. (IE: rubygems will be included, but
> not every single common library).
>
>
>
Thorleif,
Thanks for the feedback. Like Brian mentioned, adding these gems is
easy for a Ruby user(we package rubygems).
We're looking at the problem of installing gem libraries into Ruby such
that it is both Solaris packaging and rubygems compatible.
Once that piece is behind us, we will package individual gems, into our
Ruby packaging.
fyi - I added your requirements to the feature requests list at
http://wikis.sun.com/display/WebStack/Ruby+On+Rails+Stack+for+OpenSolaris
-ps
--
Prashant Srinivasan
F/OSS Enthusiast
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
http://blogs.sun.com/prashant
GnuPG key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x82FBDE5A
_______________________________________________
webstack-discuss mailing list
webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
159
From:
Menlo Park, CA, USA
Registered:
4/17/06
|
|
|
|
Re: Ruby/Rails components -
Posted:
Oct 18, 2007 5:16 PM
in response to: psriniva
|
|
> Once that piece is behind us, we will package individual gems, into
our . . . .
To clarify that comment - the idea is to pick a select set of
libraries(gems) to petition the OpenSolaris ARC with. To maintain
rubygems compatibility is of utmost important since we cannot possibly
package all the gems available out there, and also to be upgrade-friendly.
-ps
Prashant Srinivasan wrote:
> Brandorr wrote:
>
>> On 10/18/07, Thorleif Wiik <wiik at pixelpark dot com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> today, I received a request by a customer to migrate their application stack from linux to Solaris 10 U4.
>>>
>>> The request looks like this:
>>>
>>> ruby >= 1.8.5
>>> rubygems >= 0.9.4
>>> mysql-ruby >= 2.7.3
>>> fastthread >= 1.0
>>> rspec >= 1.0.5
>>> log4r >= 1.0.5
>>> activerecord >= 1.15.3
>>> activesupport >= 1.4.2
>>> mongrel >= 1.0.1
>>> libgpg-error >= 1.5
>>> libgcrypt >= 1.2.4
>>> rake >= 0.7.3
>>>
>>>
>> Thorleif,
>>
>> Most, if not all, of these Ruby apps and libraries can be installed as
>> Gems. Could you check with your client, and verify that "gem install
>> rails" is what they are used to. (IE: rubygems will be included, but
>> not every single common library).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Thorleif,
>
> Thanks for the feedback. Like Brian mentioned, adding these gems is
> easy for a Ruby user(we package rubygems).
>
> We're looking at the problem of installing gem libraries into Ruby such
> that it is both Solaris packaging and rubygems compatible.
> Once that piece is behind us, we will package individual gems, into our
> Ruby packaging.
>
> fyi - I added your requirements to the feature requests list at
> http://wikis.sun.com/display/WebStack/Ruby+On+Rails+Stack+for+OpenSolaris
>
> -ps
>
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
webstack-discuss mailing list
webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
262
From:
Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom
Registered:
5/2/06
|
|
|
|
Re: Ruby/Rails components -
Posted:
Oct 26, 2007 2:57 AM
in response to: psriniva
|
|
Not sure about trunk (being its still OS-specific). But it seems OSX just
raised the bar:
http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/ruby/wiki/WhatsNewInLeopard
On 19/10/2007, Prashant Srinivasan <Prashant dot Srinivasan at sun dot com> wrote:
> > Once that piece is behind us, we will package individual gems, into
> our . . . .
>
> To clarify that comment - the idea is to pick a select set of
> libraries(gems) to petition the OpenSolaris ARC with. To maintain
> rubygems compatibility is of utmost important since we cannot possibly
> package all the gems available out there, and also to be upgrade-friendly.
> -ps
>
> Prashant Srinivasan wrote:
> > Brandorr wrote:
> >
> >> On 10/18/07, Thorleif Wiik <wiik at pixelpark dot com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> today, I received a request by a customer to migrate their application stack from linux to Solaris 10 U4.
> >>>
> >>> The request looks like this:
> >>>
> >>> ruby >= 1.8.5
> >>> rubygems >= 0.9.4
> >>> mysql-ruby >= 2.7.3
> >>> fastthread >= 1.0
> >>> rspec >= 1.0.5
> >>> log4r >= 1.0.5
> >>> activerecord >= 1.15.3
> >>> activesupport >= 1.4.2
> >>> mongrel >= 1.0.1
> >>> libgpg-error >= 1.5
> >>> libgcrypt >= 1.2.4
> >>> rake >= 0.7.3
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Thorleif,
> >>
> >> Most, if not all, of these Ruby apps and libraries can be installed as
> >> Gems. Could you check with your client, and verify that "gem install
> >> rails" is what they are used to. (IE: rubygems will be included, but
> >> not every single common library).
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Thorleif,
> >
> > Thanks for the feedback. Like Brian mentioned, adding these gems is
> > easy for a Ruby user(we package rubygems).
> >
> > We're looking at the problem of installing gem libraries into Ruby such
> > that it is both Solaris packaging and rubygems compatible.
> > Once that piece is behind us, we will package individual gems, into our
> > Ruby packaging.
> >
> > fyi - I added your requirements to the feature requests list at
> > http://wikis.sun.com/display/WebStack/Ruby+On+Rails+Stack+for+OpenSolaris
> >
> > -ps
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> webstack-discuss mailing list
> webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
>
--
Rasputnik :: Jack of All Trades - Master of Nuns
http://number9.hellooperator.net/
_______________________________________________
webstack-discuss mailing list
webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
10
From:
Berlin, Germany
Registered:
3/24/06
|
|
|
|
Re: Ruby/Rails components -
Posted:
Oct 27, 2007 5:43 AM
in response to: number9
|
|
Hi,
interesting to see, that also the dtrace probe from joyent is included.
https://dtrace.joyent.com/projects/ruby-dtrace
Should be included in webstack, too.
Thorleif
> Not sure about trunk (being its still OS-specific). But it seems OSX just
> raised the bar:
>
> http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/ruby/wiki/WhatsNewInLeopard
>
> On 19/10/2007, Prashant Srinivasan <Prashant dot Srinivasan at sun dot com> wrote:
>
>> > Once that piece is behind us, we will package individual gems, into
>> our . . . .
>>
>> To clarify that comment - the idea is to pick a select set of
>> libraries(gems) to petition the OpenSolaris ARC with. To maintain
>> rubygems compatibility is of utmost important since we cannot possibly
>> package all the gems available out there, and also to be upgrade-friendly.
>> -ps
>>
>> Prashant Srinivasan wrote:
>>
>>> Brandorr wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 10/18/07, Thorleif Wiik <wiik at pixelpark dot com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> today, I received a request by a customer to migrate their application stack from linux to Solaris 10 U4.
>>>>>
>>>>> The request looks like this:
>>>>>
>>>>> ruby >= 1.8.5
>>>>> rubygems >= 0.9.4
>>>>> mysql-ruby >= 2.7.3
>>>>> fastthread >= 1.0
>>>>> rspec >= 1.0.5
>>>>> log4r >= 1.0.5
>>>>> activerecord >= 1.15.3
>>>>> activesupport >= 1.4.2
>>>>> mongrel >= 1.0.1
>>>>> libgpg-error >= 1.5
>>>>> libgcrypt >= 1.2.4
>>>>> rake >= 0.7.3
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Thorleif,
>>>>
>>>> Most, if not all, of these Ruby apps and libraries can be installed as
>>>> Gems. Could you check with your client, and verify that "gem install
>>>> rails" is what they are used to. (IE: rubygems will be included, but
>>>> not every single common library).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Thorleif,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the feedback. Like Brian mentioned, adding these gems is
>>> easy for a Ruby user(we package rubygems).
>>>
>>> We're looking at the problem of installing gem libraries into Ruby such
>>> that it is both Solaris packaging and rubygems compatible.
>>> Once that piece is behind us, we will package individual gems, into our
>>> Ruby packaging.
>>>
>>> fyi - I added your requirements to the feature requests list at
>>> http://wikis.sun.com/display/WebStack/Ruby+On+Rails+Stack+for+OpenSolaris
>>>
>>> -ps
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> webstack-discuss mailing list
>> webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
>>
>>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
webstack-discuss mailing list
webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
159
From:
Menlo Park, CA, USA
Registered:
4/17/06
|
|
|
|
Re: Ruby/Rails components -
Posted:
Nov 1, 2007 12:22 PM
in response to: t.wiik
|
|
I've added this into the feature list at
http://wikis.sun.com/display/WebStack/Ruby+On+Rails+Stack+for+OpenSolaris
so that we can put this into consideration for the next rev.
-ps
Thorleif Wiik wrote:
> Hi,
>
> interesting to see, that also the dtrace probe from joyent is included.
>
> https://dtrace.joyent.com/projects/ruby-dtrace
>
> Should be included in webstack, too.
>
> Thorleif
>
>
>> Not sure about trunk (being its still OS-specific). But it seems OSX just
>> raised the bar:
>>
>> http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/ruby/wiki/WhatsNewInLeopard
>>
>> On 19/10/2007, Prashant Srinivasan <Prashant dot Srinivasan at sun dot com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> > Once that piece is behind us, we will package individual gems, into
>>> our . . . .
>>>
>>> To clarify that comment - the idea is to pick a select set of
>>> libraries(gems) to petition the OpenSolaris ARC with. To maintain
>>> rubygems compatibility is of utmost important since we cannot possibly
>>> package all the gems available out there, and also to be upgrade-friendly.
>>> -ps
>>>
>>> Prashant Srinivasan wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Brandorr wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 10/18/07, Thorleif Wiik <wiik at pixelpark dot com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> today, I received a request by a customer to migrate their application stack from linux to Solaris 10 U4.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The request looks like this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ruby >= 1.8.5
>>>>>> rubygems >= 0.9.4
>>>>>> mysql-ruby >= 2.7.3
>>>>>> fastthread >= 1.0
>>>>>> rspec >= 1.0.5
>>>>>> log4r >= 1.0.5
>>>>>> activerecord >= 1.15.3
>>>>>> activesupport >= 1.4.2
>>>>>> mongrel >= 1.0.1
>>>>>> libgpg-error >= 1.5
>>>>>> libgcrypt >= 1.2.4
>>>>>> rake >= 0.7.3
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Thorleif,
>>>>>
>>>>> Most, if not all, of these Ruby apps and libraries can be installed as
>>>>> Gems. Could you check with your client, and verify that "gem install
>>>>> rails" is what they are used to. (IE: rubygems will be included, but
>>>>> not every single common library).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Thorleif,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the feedback. Like Brian mentioned, adding these gems is
>>>> easy for a Ruby user(we package rubygems).
>>>>
>>>> We're looking at the problem of installing gem libraries into Ruby such
>>>> that it is both Solaris packaging and rubygems compatible.
>>>> Once that piece is behind us, we will package individual gems, into our
>>>> Ruby packaging.
>>>>
>>>> fyi - I added your requirements to the feature requests list at
>>>> http://wikis.sun.com/display/WebStack/Ruby+On+Rails+Stack+for+OpenSolaris
>>>>
>>>> -ps
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> webstack-discuss mailing list
>>> webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
>>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> webstack-discuss mailing list
> webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
>
--
Prashant Srinivasan
F/OSS Enthusiast
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
http://blogs.sun.com/prashant
GnuPG key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x82FBDE5A
_______________________________________________
webstack-discuss mailing list
webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
10
From:
Berlin, Germany
Registered:
3/24/06
|
|
|
|
Re: Ruby/Rails components - mysql client lib
version (4|5)
Posted:
Oct 27, 2007 5:53 AM
in response to: number9
|
|
Hi,
one word to mysql-ruby >= 2.7.3 .
We complied the stack below with Sun Studio 12 on our own for the customer
with the bundled mysql 4 libs from Solaris 10 U4.
Testing this against the customer application stack, running a mysql 5
server
gives the result, that there's an incompatibility between mysql 4 and 5
client libs.
This is because mysql changed something in the mysql authentication
between version 4 and 5.
As we result if this, we also compiled the mysql5 client libs for
Solaris 10 U4 to have this work.
Thorleif
> Not sure about trunk (being its still OS-specific). But it seems OSX just
> raised the bar:
>
> http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/ruby/wiki/WhatsNewInLeopard
>
> On 19/10/2007, Prashant Srinivasan <Prashant dot Srinivasan at sun dot com> wrote:
>
>> > Once that piece is behind us, we will package individual gems, into
>> our . . . .
>>
>> To clarify that comment - the idea is to pick a select set of
>> libraries(gems) to petition the OpenSolaris ARC with. To maintain
>> rubygems compatibility is of utmost important since we cannot possibly
>> package all the gems available out there, and also to be upgrade-friendly.
>> -ps
>>
>> Prashant Srinivasan wrote:
>>
>>> Brandorr wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 10/18/07, Thorleif Wiik <wiik at pixelpark dot com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> today, I received a request by a customer to migrate their application stack from linux to Solaris 10 U4.
>>>>>
>>>>> The request looks like this:
>>>>>
>>>>> ruby >= 1.8.5
>>>>> rubygems >= 0.9.4
>>>>> mysql-ruby >= 2.7.3
>>>>> fastthread >= 1.0
>>>>> rspec >= 1.0.5
>>>>> log4r >= 1.0.5
>>>>> activerecord >= 1.15.3
>>>>> activesupport >= 1.4.2
>>>>> mongrel >= 1.0.1
>>>>> libgpg-error >= 1.5
>>>>> libgcrypt >= 1.2.4
>>>>> rake >= 0.7.3
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Thorleif,
>>>>
>>>> Most, if not all, of these Ruby apps and libraries can be installed as
>>>> Gems. Could you check with your client, and verify that "gem install
>>>> rails" is what they are used to. (IE: rubygems will be included, but
>>>> not every single common library).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Thorleif,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the feedback. Like Brian mentioned, adding these gems is
>>> easy for a Ruby user(we package rubygems).
>>>
>>> We're looking at the problem of installing gem libraries into Ruby such
>>> that it is both Solaris packaging and rubygems compatible.
>>> Once that piece is behind us, we will package individual gems, into our
>>> Ruby packaging.
>>>
>>> fyi - I added your requirements to the feature requests list at
>>> http://wikis.sun.com/display/WebStack/Ruby+On+Rails+Stack+for+OpenSolaris
>>>
>>> -ps
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> webstack-discuss mailing list
>> webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
>>
>>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
webstack-discuss mailing list
webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
159
From:
Menlo Park, CA, USA
Registered:
4/17/06
|
|
|
|
Re: Ruby/Rails components - mysql client lib
version (4|5)
Posted:
Nov 1, 2007 12:44 PM
in response to: t.wiik
|
|
> As we result if this, we also compiled the mysql5 client libs for
Solaris 10 U4 to have this work.
Did you have to recompile, in order to use the new libs? (as opposed to
dynamically linking to the new libs)
This seems to imply that we can provide mysql-ruby support for MySQL 5
or MySQL 4, but not both at the same time.
Since you can only have one gem installed with a certain name+version
combination.
MySQL 5.x.y will be in snv_79 onward, so we'd probably compile for 5.x.y.
-ps
Thorleif Wiik wrote:
> Hi,
>
> one word to mysql-ruby >= 2.7.3 .
>
> We complied the stack below with Sun Studio 12 on our own for the customer
> with the bundled mysql 4 libs from Solaris 10 U4.
>
> Testing this against the customer application stack, running a mysql 5
> server
> gives the result, that there's an incompatibility between mysql 4 and 5
> client libs.
> This is because mysql changed something in the mysql authentication
> between version 4 and 5.
>
> As we result if this, we also compiled the mysql5 client libs for
> Solaris 10 U4 to have this work.
>
> Thorleif
>
>> Not sure about trunk (being its still OS-specific). But it seems OSX just
>> raised the bar:
>>
>> http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/ruby/wiki/WhatsNewInLeopard
>>
>> On 19/10/2007, Prashant Srinivasan <Prashant dot Srinivasan at sun dot com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> > Once that piece is behind us, we will package individual gems, into
>>> our . . . .
>>>
>>> To clarify that comment - the idea is to pick a select set of
>>> libraries(gems) to petition the OpenSolaris ARC with. To maintain
>>> rubygems compatibility is of utmost important since we cannot possibly
>>> package all the gems available out there, and also to be upgrade-friendly.
>>> -ps
>>>
>>> Prashant Srinivasan wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Brandorr wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 10/18/07, Thorleif Wiik <wiik at pixelpark dot com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> today, I received a request by a customer to migrate their application stack from linux to Solaris 10 U4.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The request looks like this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ruby >= 1.8.5
>>>>>> rubygems >= 0.9.4
>>>>>> mysql-ruby >= 2.7.3
>>>>>> fastthread >= 1.0
>>>>>> rspec >= 1.0.5
>>>>>> log4r >= 1.0.5
>>>>>> activerecord >= 1.15.3
>>>>>> activesupport >= 1.4.2
>>>>>> mongrel >= 1.0.1
>>>>>> libgpg-error >= 1.5
>>>>>> libgcrypt >= 1.2.4
>>>>>> rake >= 0.7.3
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Thorleif,
>>>>>
>>>>> Most, if not all, of these Ruby apps and libraries can be installed as
>>>>> Gems. Could you check with your client, and verify that "gem install
>>>>> rails" is what they are used to. (IE: rubygems will be included, but
>>>>> not every single common library).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Thorleif,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the feedback. Like Brian mentioned, adding these gems is
>>>> easy for a Ruby user(we package rubygems).
>>>>
>>>> We're looking at the problem of installing gem libraries into Ruby such
>>>> that it is both Solaris packaging and rubygems compatible.
>>>> Once that piece is behind us, we will package individual gems, into our
>>>> Ruby packaging.
>>>>
>>>> fyi - I added your requirements to the feature requests list at
>>>> http://wikis.sun.com/display/WebStack/Ruby+On+Rails+Stack+for+OpenSolaris
>>>>
>>>> -ps
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> webstack-discuss mailing list
>>> webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
>>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> webstack-discuss mailing list
> webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
>
--
Prashant Srinivasan
F/OSS Enthusiast
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
http://blogs.sun.com/prashant
GnuPG key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x82FBDE5A
_______________________________________________
webstack-discuss mailing list
webstack-discuss at opensolaris dot org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/webstack-discuss
|
|
|
|
|
Way to go!
<pre><code>- TWRUG</code></pre>The rel_1-2-3 tag doesn't seem to exist in the repository?
@Jamie: Should be there now
Changes in Ruby 1.8.6
Thanks for another great release
Michael: Thanks, perhaps I was a little eager ;)
Does breakpoint now work w/ Rails 1.2.3 & Ruby 1.8.6?
Great release! I need those fixes!