On Thu, 30 Sep 2004, Brian Candler wrote:

>> much more automake supports, in opposition to setup.rb, the unistall option
>> too.
> Good point. If that's important then I'd go with Gems again.


   ~/tmp > find
   ./lib
   ./lib/a.rb
   ./setup.rb

   ~/tmp > for op in config setup install;do ruby setup.rb $op || sudo ruby setup.rb $op;done
   ---> lib
   <--- lib
   ---> lib
   <--- lib
   ---> lib
   mkdir -p /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/
   install a.rb /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/
   Permission denied - /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/a.rb
   Try 'ruby setup.rb --help' for detailed usage.
   Password:
   ---> lib
   mkdir -p /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/
   install a.rb /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/
   <--- lib

   ~/tmp > cat InstalledFiles
   /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/a.rb

   ~/tmp > sudo rm -rf `cat InstalledFiles`

doesn't get much easier than that.

on another note - one thing to consider is that mkmf, setup.rb, install.rb, or
whatever tend to be much more stable than the autotools which, almost by
definition, must continually evolve to support every /bin/sh shell on every
system out there.  a ruby based install (which brian correctly pointed out as
known to be effective since ruby would already be installed) is going to vary
ALOT less since the set of interpreters it has to run under is much less.
take install.rb for example, it hasn't changed since i started using ruby and
works with 1.6.x, 1.8.x, probably even others on *nix, windows, etc.  it's
also only about 100 lines long.  autotools does not work on windows.


-a
--
===============================================================================
| EMAIL   :: Ara [dot] T [dot] Howard [at] noaa [dot] gov
| PHONE   :: 303.497.6469
| A flower falls, even though we love it;
| and a weed grows, even though we do not love it. 
|   --Dogen
===============================================================================