RubyInstaller 1.9.2-p290 released

Ruby
1

In combination with the rest of the RubyInstaller team, I’m very
pleased to announce the release of RubyInstaller packages for Ruby
1.9.2-p290

As usual, installer and 7z packages are available at RubyInstaller
website and RubyForge for download:

http://rubyforge.org/frs/?group_id=167

For verification, MD5 signatures of each file released are provided:

0531aa59ab628e34d593916c4b3c01fe *ruby-1.9.2-p290-doc-chm.7z
a9009c62f4da9bd936651cd7631eb283 *ruby-1.9.2-p290-i386-mingw32.7z
2ebae0cddbcc3176d145b59f3cc02c43 *rubyinstaller-1.9.2-p290.exe

Installer is also digitally signed to avoid alterations and UAC
warnings.

You can read Ruby’s own announcement here:

http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/385319

= What’s new?

Beyond what is covered by Ruby itself, we have our own set of
improvements:

  • Enhancements:

    • Upgraded Ruby 1.9.2 to patchlevel 290
    • Upgraded libyaml to 0.1.4 in Ruby 1.9
    • Upgraded RubyGems to 1.7.2 on all versions of Ruby
    • Upgraded rb-readline to version 0.4.0
    • Upgraded OpenSSL to 1.0.0d on all versions of Ruby
    • Build Ruby using GCC 4.5.2 (TDM-1 release)
    • Add support for Tcl/Tk 8.5.10 in recipes, installers, and archives
    • Change from MIT license to Modified BSD License (3-clause)

  • Deprecations:

    • Installers now enforces Windows XP as minimum OS. GH-54
2

On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Leonardo Valeri Manera
[email protected] wrote:

On 16 July 2011 02:36, Luis L. [email protected] wrote:

In combination with the rest of the RubyInstaller team, I’m very
pleased to announce the release of RubyInstaller packages for Ruby
1.9.2-p290

Very nice, congratulations!

Less nicely, we have docs-generation grief again, Louis.

Well, dunno why you have that when everything here compiled
successfully?

I wouldn’t have been able to deliver the installers if ruby19:docs
didn’t complete successfully.

Are you using Ruby 1.9.2 to generate these docs? I’m using Ruby 1.8.7

Since we are stuck in a old version of RDoc (due rdoc_chm), this
version is not that compatible with 1.9.2 as are newer versions.

Can you confirm this?

3

On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Leonardo Valeri Manera
[email protected] wrote:

No, even with RDoc 3.x installed ruby19:docs should be using 2.5.11

Now, since you’re using 1.9.2, that could explain the encoding issue
when doing RDoc.

I can only tell you that RDoc 2.5.x works best with 1.8.7, and that is
how RubyInstaller generated it.

If someone took the time to update rdoc_chm to work with RDoc 3.x,
then we could easily solve this (hint hint) :wink:

4
  • Add support for Tcl/Tk 8.5.10 in recipes, installers, and archives

Sweet Tk works in 1.9 without hanging on exit. Thanks! I don’t need
those odd gems just to get Tk running in mingw anymore :slight_smile:

-roger-

5

On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Leonardo Valeri Manera
[email protected] wrote:

Now, since you’re using 1.9.2, that could explain the encoding issue
when doing RDoc.

I can only tell you that RDoc 2.5.x works best with 1.8.7, and that is
how RubyInstaller generated it.

Ok. noted. Although a whiny little child in me keeps going “But this
worked when I made 1.9.2p190!”

Well, it is breaking in some files that had documentation changes.

Please note that nothing in RubyInstaller’s infrastructure did change
to make that hard for you.

The issue is being raised when RDoc fails to process Ruby source code,
nothing less.

Between p180 and p290, source code do change :slight_smile:

Anyway, this sounds like a pain to fix from your tone, so why not just
be specific about 1.9.x being unsupported/broken w.r.t. building the
whole package in the readme?

Well, ideally I’ve already generated the CHM for you, which you can
download as independent packages…

Trying to understand your need to build it again…

If someone took the time to update rdoc_chm to work with RDoc 3.x,
then we could easily solve this (hint hint) :wink:

Ladies and Gentlemen, the master of subtlety himself! :smiley:

I thought for a second that my brain-wash/hipnosys was going to
work… need to practice more :wink:

Tempting as the idea is, my ruby-fu is so weaksauce rdoc_chm is opaque
to me. I’m afraid when it comes to ruby I’m a burger-level consumer :slight_smile:

I’ll light a candle for it though - can’t go on being tied to 1.8
forever, as 1.8 itself won’t be around forever.

Well, I don’t think several things changed from RDoc 2.5 to 3.x to
make the plugin work.

Why you don’t checkout rdoc_chm source code and give it a whirl?

Perhaps it just works, but it needs someone to try it out.

Don’t underestimate what you can accomplish if you take the time to
look into it.

We all started somewhere :slight_smile: