On Monday 20 September 2004 08:54 pm, Ara.T.Howard / noaa.gov wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004, Tim Hunter wrote:
> > Ara.T.Howard wrote:
> >> i don't know who originally wrote install.rb or where i got it so thanks
> >> to original author and here's the hack:
> >
> > I believe install.rb is now setup.rb:
> > http://raa.ruby-lang.org/project/setup/
>
> to my knowledge setup.rb is distinct, and probably more fully featured,
> than install.rb.
>
> in either case i've been using intall.rb and it doesn't solve the 'shebang'
> problem - does setup.rb handle the shebang issue?  if so i'll probably
> start using it - i use install.rb because i have been.  ;-)

I use my own variation of install.rb, but have wanted to use setup.rb instead 
b/c it seems to be more robust and feature rich. BUT it clutters up the main 
directory more (e.g. 'setup.rb' plus 'config.save' and 'InstalledFiles'), and 
it also is not as simple to use, requiring three operations:

  ruby setup.rb config
  ruby setup.rb setup
  ruby setup.rb install

Lastly, install.rb is small enough to easily be placed in a rakefile, which 
makes my life easir. Say you're currently in a test dir running a test, you 
can fix a bug and run 'rake install' w/o cd'ing up the main dir. (Sure 
there's many ways to deal with such things, but that's how I do it.)

If setup.rb ever addressed these issues then I would switch, but until then 
install.rb works fine for my Ruby projects.

I like your modification too, I will use it :)

Thanks!
T.


-- 
( o _  елеще┴
 //    trans.
/ \    transami / runbox.com

I don't give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way.
-Mark Twain