------art_23762_30849653.1191451040816
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

If rake is to be included,  perhaps we could replace the Makefile system
with a Rakefile to build ruby itself.
There is a lot of vestigial autoconf stuff in there.
Sure would be good to see a nice clean build Rakefile!

Of course, you would need to have ruby preinstalled in order to build it.


On 10/3/07, Joel VanderWerf <vjoel / path.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>
> Jacob Fugal wrote:
> > On 10/3/07, NAKAMURA, Hiroshi <nakahiro / sarion.co.jp> wrote:
> >> ruby core team would like to include Rake in Ruby 1.9.  Let's discuss
> >> about importing Rake into Ruby's svn repository.
> >>
> >
> > Will Rake be "fully" bundled (core), or "pre-installed-gem" bundled
> > (std-lib)? My vote is for the latter.
>
> Does "core" still mean that the lib is built into the interpreter and
> doesn't need to be required? (File is core, but FileUtils is stdlib,
> right?)
>
> In that case, my vote is for the latter too, to support small memory
> embedded situations (64Mb ARM).
>
> I was unpleasantly surprised to see that -rubygems adds about 5Mb to the
> process:
>
> "ruby"            : 2180Kb
>
> "ruby -rubygems"  : 7048Kb
>
> (windows, latest OCI).
>
> --
>         vjoel : Joel VanderWerf : path berkeley edu : 510 665 3407
>
>

------art_23762_30849653.1191451040816
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

If rake is to be included,&nbsp; perhaps we could replace the Makefile system with a Rakefile to build ruby itself.<br>There is a lot of vestigial autoconf stuff in there.<br>Sure would be good to see a nice clean build Rakefile!
<br><br>Of course, you would need to have ruby preinstalled in order to build it.<br><br><br><div><span classmail_quote">On 10/3/07, <b classmail_sendername">Joel VanderWerf</b> &lt;<a hrefailto:vjoel / path.berkeley.edu">
vjoel / path.berkeley.edu</a>&gt; wrote:</span><blockquote classmail_quote" styleorder-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Jacob Fugal wrote:<br>&gt; On 10/3/07, NAKAMURA, Hiroshi &lt;
<a hrefailto:nakahiro / sarion.co.jp">nakahiro / sarion.co.jp</a>&gt; wrote:<br>&gt;&gt; ruby core team would like to include Rake in Ruby 1.9.&nbsp;&nbsp;Let&#39;s discuss<br>&gt;&gt; about importing Rake into Ruby&#39;s svn repository.
<br>&gt;&gt;<br>&gt;<br>&gt; Will Rake be &quot;fully&quot; bundled (core), or &quot;pre-installed-gem&quot; bundled<br>&gt; (std-lib)? My vote is for the latter.<br><br>Does &quot;core&quot; still mean that the lib is built into the interpreter and
<br>doesn&#39;t need to be required? (File is core, but FileUtils is stdlib, right?)<br><br>In that case, my vote is for the latter too, to support small memory<br>embedded situations (64Mb ARM).<br><br>I was unpleasantly surprised to see that -rubygems adds about 5Mb to the
<br>process:<br><br>&quot;ruby&quot;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;: 2180Kb<br><br>&quot;ruby -rubygems&quot;&nbsp;&nbsp;: 7048Kb<br><br>(windows, latest OCI).<br><br>--<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;vjoel : Joel VanderWerf : path berkeley edu : 510 665 3407<br><br></blockquote>
</div><br>

------art_23762_30849653.1191451040816--