experchange > ruby

WJ (11-08-15, 10:57 PM)
The version of Ruby 2.0 available from works correctly
under Windows XP.

However, 2.1 and 2.2 from that site don't run.

Is there anywhere else to download 2.2 for Windows XP?
Kaz Kylheku (11-09-15, 08:36 AM)
On 2015-11-08, WJ <w_a_x_man> wrote:
> The version of Ruby 2.0 available from works
> correctly under Windows XP.
> However, 2.1 and 2.2 from that site don't run. ^^^^^


Even in America (at least in some of the larger cities, though exclusive of the
slummy areas) that is "doesn't".

Maybe it "don't run" because Ruby-pushing monkeys don't test.

"If it compiles, ship it."

> Is there anywhere else to download 2.2 for Windows XP?


Begging for downloads?

Ah, it must be that this can't this be solved in five lines of Gauche Scheme.
James Pacheco (11-09-15, 09:11 AM)
On Sunday, November 8, 2015 at 10:36:53 PM UTC-8, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> Even in America (at least in some of the larger cities, though exclusive of the
> slummy areas) that is "doesn't".


Because they specified two different versions, it's "don't", not "doesn't". Does is singular subjects, do is for plural. They were in the right.

> Maybe it "don't run" because Ruby-pushing monkeys don't test.
> "If it compiles, ship it."


I really don't understand this aggression here. It feels a bit misguided and misdirected.

> On 2015-11-08, WJ <w_a_x_man> wrote:
> > Is there anywhere else to download 2.2 for Windows XP?


I've not had any problems with 2.2 on Windows 10, so I'm not sure what the exact issue you're having is (some output of the error would help, probably).

Barring that, and keeping in mind that I haven't tried it, Uru is also mentioned on ruby-lang as an option for Windows users:

It supposedly gives support similar to RVM for other systems (which I *have* used, on both Mac OS and Linux, and quite like). But, that doesn't mean it will work for you.

Perhaps you could also try to ensure that you're downloading the 32bit version of 2.2 from RubyInstaller, since you probably are running XP in 32bit (If I had to guess...). 32bit is generally recommended by RubyInstaller anyway...

Best of luck!
Robert Klemme (11-11-15, 12:27 AM)
On 08.11.2015 21:57, WJ wrote:
> The version of Ruby 2.0 available from works correctly
> under Windows XP.
> However, 2.1 and 2.2 from that site don't run.
> Is there anywhere else to download 2.2 for Windows XP?


I use the Cygwin version (albeit not on XP) - that works pretty good.
You do get a complete Unix like environment with it which might what you
want - or not.

Generally I would recommend to move away from XP rather sooner than
later. Depending on what you want to do a VM with Linux might work, too.

Kind regards

robert
WJ (11-12-15, 05:02 AM)
Robert Klemme wrote:

> On 08.11.2015 21:57, WJ wrote:
> I use the Cygwin version (albeit not on XP) - that works
> pretty good. You do get a complete Unix like environment with
> it which might what you want - or not.
> Generally I would recommend to move away from XP rather sooner
> than later. Depending on what you want to do a VM with Linux
> might work, too.


I installed JRuby (which provides the equivalent of Ruby 2.2).
It seems to work correctly. I'll use it when I need the extra
features of 2.2.

Windows XP seems preferable to Windows 10, which some call
spyware. I can do everything I want under XP; "upgrading"
would just be a headache.

Both of my laptops have XP. Recently I was transcoding some
videos copied from DVDs on the faster of the two. When
transcoding videos with a picture size of 352x480 (NTSC;
aspect ratio 4:3) without doing any rescaling or delacing, the
rate of transcoding was 500 frames per second using ffmpeg to
produce mpeg2 output. Blazing fast. I have no need or desire
for a more bloated, sluggish version of Windows.

XP hasn't stopped working. It's very unfortunate that some
software producers are almost forcing people to hand over
more money to the microsoft monoply.
dsmikej (01-08-19, 04:04 PM)
понедельник, 9 ноября 2015 г., 0:59:48 UTC+4 пользователь WJ написал:
> The version of Ruby 2.0 available from works correctly
> under Windows XP.
> However, 2.1 and 2.2 from that site don't run.
> Is there anywhere else to download 2.2 for Windows XP?

Read post from MarkDBlackwell on there is some useful info. But i don not make programs by itself.. Just used some gems from github.
Similar Threads