win32utils devel - Feb 2005 - Re: win32utils installer

> -----Original Message-----
> From: win32utils-devel-bounces@rubyforge.org 
> [mailto:win32utils-devel-bounces@rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of 
> Shashank Date
> Sent: Monday, February 28, 2005 6:36 AM
> To: Shashank Date
> Cc: win32utils-devel@rubyforge.org
> Subject: [Win32utils-devel] Re: win32utils installer
> 
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> I am working on this bug report by Martin. I am surprised 
> that this has 
> gone unnoticed for so long. Can we do something to catch such 
> omissions 
> in the test/unit modules?
> 
> -- Shashank
There are only a couple of .rb files that we need to worry about.

win32-eventlog - There''s an mc.rb file.  There are tests for it in the
tc_mc.rb file, so you should see failures if it''s not included. 

win32-sapi - This is a pure Ruby package, and there''s a test suite in
tc_sapi5.rb.  Again, you should see failures if it''s not included.  I
think I released this after v2 of the installer, though, so not to
worry.

My guess is that you already have them installed, and that''s why you
didn''t see any failures.

The rest of the .rb files are a (usually incomplete) pure Ruby
equivalent of the C version.  I do NOT want them included in the
installer.

Regards,

Dan

Berger, Daniel wrote:
>There are only a couple of .rb files that we need to worry about.
>
>win32-eventlog - There''s an mc.rb file.  There are tests for it in
the
>tc_mc.rb file, so you should see failures if it''s not included. 
>
>win32-sapi - This is a pure Ruby package, and there''s a test suite
in
>tc_sapi5.rb.  Again, you should see failures if it''s not included. 
I
>think I released this after v2 of the installer, though, so not to
>worry.
>
>My guess is that you already have them installed, and that''s why
you
>didn''t see any failures.
>  
>
That is correct !
>The rest of the .rb files are a (usually incomplete) pure Ruby
>equivalent of the C version.  I do NOT want them included in the
>installer.
>  
>
Great ! I had not included them either but was not sure if they were 
required.
Thanks,
>Regards,
>
>Dan
>  
>
-- shanko