Mongrel users - Jan 2008 - Mongrel doesn''t start under Rails 2.0.2/Win XP

All,

Mongrel 1.1.3
Rails 2.0.2
Ruby 1.8.6
Windows XP SP2

When I issue the command "ruby script/server" from any of my Rails
projects on v. 2.0.2, I get a Windows dialog with the error:

"The application has failed to start because MSVCR80.dll was not found.
Re-installing the application may fix this problem."

I''ve gone through the process of attempting to introduce MSVCR80.dll
into my PATH but just generate more errors.

I suspect that at some point, the precompiled Mongrel gem started
getting compiled with a newer version of the MS C compiler than my
runtime supports.  I have the Windows Platform SDK for Windows Server
2003 R2 installed.

Does anyone know if the runtime support for Mongrel has changed in the
last few revs.?  Or is my theory completely wack?

Thanks,
Wes Gamble
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Wes, are your using RMagick 2.0 or above? I ask because I noticed in the 
release notes recently that it was compiled with VC 8 (2005). Perhaps 
this is the problem?

Wes Gamble wrote:
> All,
>
> Mongrel 1.1.3
> Rails 2.0.2
> Ruby 1.8.6
> Windows XP SP2
>
> When I issue the command "ruby script/server" from any of my
Rails
> projects on v. 2.0.2, I get a Windows dialog with the error:
>
> "The application has failed to start because MSVCR80.dll was not
found.
> Re-installing the application may fix this problem."
>
> I''ve gone through the process of attempting to introduce
MSVCR80.dll
> into my PATH but just generate more errors.
>
> I suspect that at some point, the precompiled Mongrel gem started
> getting compiled with a newer version of the MS C compiler than my
> runtime supports.  I have the Windows Platform SDK for Windows Server
> 2003 R2 installed.
>
> Does anyone know if the runtime support for Mongrel has changed in the
> last few revs.?  Or is my theory completely wack?
>
> Thanks,
> Wes Gamble
>

Current resolution:

Rolled back to Mongrel 1.1 and I can run it.

The original error (w/Mongrel 1.1.3) was a Windows dialog that displayed 
""The application has failed to start because MSVCR80.dll was not
found.
Re-installing the application may fix this problem."  When I would click 
on that dialog''s OK button, it would pop up again and I would never be 
able to get past the error.

This behavior appears for Mongrel versions >= 1.1.1.

At 1.1, I get the error dialog once, click the OK button and Mongrel 
proceeds to start up.

Wes

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

On Jan 11, 2008 6:00 AM, Wes Gamble <lists at ruby-forum.com>
wrote:
> Current resolution:
>
> Rolled back to Mongrel 1.1 and I can run it.
>
But again, you''re using RMagick 2.0?

It seems you''re missing the VC8 C runtimes, and later versions of
Mongrel fire the requirement.

Try this on irb:
require ''rubygems''
require ''mongrel''

And you will see there is no problem with that.

Anyway, script/server is something weird, if you try "mongrel_rails
start" you will see there is no problem.

Again, you have some extension that is linked with MSVCR80.dll, and
since is RMagick, that could bring a series of problems in relation to
malloc and free.

Don''t blame us we didnt'' warn you :-)

-- 
Luis Lavena
Multimedia systems
-
A common mistake that people make when trying to design
something completely foolproof is to underestimate
the ingenuity of complete fools.
Douglas Adams

Luis,

I do not have RMagick installed at all.

I see the same exact behavior that I described above if I start mongrel 
using "mongrel_rails start".

I also see that same behavior if I go into irb and issue the "require 
rubygems" and "require mongrel" commands.

Thanks,
Wes

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Could this be a rubygems issue? I constantly get gems installing the
ruby version instead of the win32 version just because it can. If you
uninstall and re-install, does it say it is compiling? If so, you
would need to have VC6 set as your default compiler in Windows.

On Jan 11, 2008 9:40 AM, Wes Gamble <lists at ruby-forum.com>
wrote:
> Luis,
>
> I do not have RMagick installed at all.
>
> I see the same exact behavior that I described above if I start mongrel
> using "mongrel_rails start".
>
> I also see that same behavior if I go into irb and issue the "require
> rubygems" and "require mongrel" commands.
>
> Thanks,
> Wes
>
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
>
> Mongrel-users mailing list
> Mongrel-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/mongrel-users
>


-- 
Cheers,

Kevin Williams
http://www.bantamtech.com/

On Jan 11, 2008 4:51 PM, Kevin Williams <kevwil at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Could this be a rubygems issue? I constantly get gems installing the
> ruby version instead of the win32 version just because it can. If you
> uninstall and re-install, does it say it is compiling? If so, you
> would need to have VC6 set as your default compiler in Windows.
>
Will be more helpful if you provide us with the versions of ruby.

Anyway, if you''re getting that MSVCR80.dll is missing, that means that
something is getting loaded and it is reaquiring that missing library.

That could be because you installed a gem that was build with VC8
(which is not the same as the One-Click Installer, in case you used
it).

Please, provide more background information.

Can you provide your RUBY_PLATFORM and Ruby version?
ruby -v
ruby 1.8.6 (2007-09-24 patchlevel 111) [i386-mswin32]

ruby -e "puts RUBY_PLATFORM"
i386-mswin32

I can bet that you have i386-mswin32_80 as platform, since rubygems is
switching to pure ruby gems instead of pre compiled ones.

-- 
Luis Lavena
Multimedia systems
-
A common mistake that people make when trying to design
something completely foolproof is to underestimate
the ingenuity of complete fools.
Douglas Adams

Hello. I''m new to this list as of this week.
I am supporting a Win2k3Server installation of RoR. I''m not very
familiar
with what you guys are discussing but I did have a very similar error
occuring earlier in the week. I had just installed Ruby for IIS version 0.1(
http://rubyforiis.sosukodo.org/rubyforiis/). For some reason it stepped on
this dll during the install. After realizing it would be very stupid to try
to support RoR on IIS, I uninstalled this software and the error magically
disappeared. I have no further explanation for what happened.
Hope this helps.

On Jan 11, 2008 12:51 PM, Kevin Williams <kevwil at gmail.com> wrote:
> Could this be a rubygems issue? I constantly get gems installing the
> ruby version instead of the win32 version just because it can. If you
> uninstall and re-install, does it say it is compiling? If so, you
> would need to have VC6 set as your default compiler in Windows.
>
> On Jan 11, 2008 9:40 AM, Wes Gamble <lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> > Luis,
> >
> > I do not have RMagick installed at all.
> >
> > I see the same exact behavior that I described above if I start
mongrel
> > using "mongrel_rails start".
> >
> > I also see that same behavior if I go into irb and issue the
"require
> > rubygems" and "require mongrel" commands.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Wes
> >
> > --
> > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> > Mongrel-users mailing list
> > Mongrel-users at rubyforge.org
> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/mongrel-users
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> Kevin Williams
> http://www.bantamtech.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Mongrel-users mailing list
> Mongrel-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/mongrel-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/mongrel-users/attachments/20080111/99cb71bc/attachment-0001.html

On Jan 11, 2008 5:28 PM, Stephen C <bettheriver at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hello. I''m new to this list as of this week.
> I am supporting a Win2k3Server installation of RoR. I''m not very
familiar
> with what you guys are discussing but I did have a very similar error
> occuring earlier in the week. I had just installed Ruby for IIS version 0.1
> (http://rubyforiis.sosukodo.org/rubyforiis/). For some reason it stepped on
> this dll during the install. After realizing it would be very stupid to try
> to support RoR on IIS, I uninstalled this software and the error magically
> disappeared. I have no further explanation for what happened.
> Hope this helps.
>
RubyForIIS have two problems:

Is outdated.
Is compiled with VC8, which is not compatible with One-Click Installer (VC6).

Part of RubyForIIS is libfcgi and ruby-fcgi, which could be getting
loaded and thus, failing with missing dll.

-- 
Luis Lavena
Multimedia systems
-
A common mistake that people make when trying to design
something completely foolproof is to underestimate
the ingenuity of complete fools.
Douglas Adams

Luis Lavena wrote:
> Will be more helpful if you provide us with the versions of ruby.
> 
Luis,

Here is my version information.

C:\eclipse\workspace>ruby -v
ruby 1.8.6 (2007-03-13 patchlevel 0) [i386-mswin32]

C:\eclipse\workspace>ruby -e "puts RUBY_PLATFORM"
i386-mswin32

C:\eclipse\workspace>gem --version
1.0.1

C:\eclipse\workspace>gem list mongrel

*** LOCAL GEMS ***

mongrel (1.1)
mongrel_cluster (1.0.5)
mongrel_service (0.3.4)

Also, I have successfully installed C-based gems under the new rubygems 
regime of wanting to compile - AFAIK, my C environment is set up 
correctly for this.  However, installing the mongrel gem has never 
kicked off a compile, so I''m getting pre-compiled gems.

Wes
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

On Jan 11, 2008 5:49 PM, Wes Gamble <lists at ruby-forum.com>
wrote:
>
> Here is my version information.
>
> C:\eclipse\workspace>ruby -v
> ruby 1.8.6 (2007-03-13 patchlevel 0) [i386-mswin32]
>
> C:\eclipse\workspace>ruby -e "puts RUBY_PLATFORM"
> i386-mswin32
>
> C:\eclipse\workspace>gem --version
> 1.0.1
>
> C:\eclipse\workspace>gem list mongrel
>
> *** LOCAL GEMS ***
>
> mongrel (1.1)
> mongrel_cluster (1.0.5)
> mongrel_service (0.3.4)
>
Ok, it seems I lost my bet.

But the "missing MSVCR80.dll" error is because some extension is
linked with it, and your application is loading it.

You can install the Microsoft Redistributable C runtime 8.0 and maybe
that will solve the error message.
> Also, I have successfully installed C-based gems under the new rubygems
> regime of wanting to compile - AFAIK, my C environment is set up
> correctly for this.  However, installing the mongrel gem has never
> kicked off a compile, so I''m getting pre-compiled gems.
>
Yes, that version of ruby will get proper, existing compiled gems installed.

Can you provide the whole list of gems you have installed?

Also, you''re using One-Click Installer, InstantRails or Bitnami?

-- 
Luis Lavena
Multimedia systems
-
A common mistake that people make when trying to design
something completely foolproof is to underestimate
the ingenuity of complete fools.
Douglas Adams

Some more information:

(* using mongrel_rails start to startup *)

Mongrel v. 0.3.13.3: No error dialog on startup
Mongrel v. 1.0 - 1.1: Error dialog, click OK, mongrel proceeds
Mongrel v >= 1.1.1: Error dialog, click OK, error dialog reappears, no 
further progress can be made.

All I have to do is modify Mongrel versions to get these behaviors.

Does anyone know if MSVCR80.DLL is a standard part of the Microsoft 
Platform SDK for Windows Server 2003 R2 distribution?  If so, then the 
implication is I screwed up the installation somehow.

What is the latest correct version of the Windows SDK on Windows XP SP2? 
I may just try to move to that (although I''m trying to avoid that - I 
will be forsaking the Windows platform for a MacBookPro as soon as they 
announce the new models).

Wes
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

I installed with One-Click about 2 months ago.

Here are my gems (don''t make fun at how I have like almost every
version
of rails :]):

C:\eclipse\workspace\credentials>gem list

*** LOCAL GEMS ***

actionmailer (2.0.2, 2.0.1, 1.3.6, 1.3.5, 1.3.4, 1.3.3, 1.2.5)
actionpack (2.0.2, 2.0.1, 1.13.6, 1.13.5, 1.13.4, 1.13.3, 1.12.5)
actionwebservice (1.2.6, 1.2.5, 1.2.4, 1.2.3, 1.1.6)
activerecord (2.0.2, 2.0.1, 1.15.6, 1.15.5, 1.15.4, 1.15.3, 1.14.4)
activeresource (2.0.2)
activesupport (2.0.2, 2.0.1, 1.4.4, 1.4.3, 1.4.2, 1.3.1)
appcelerator (2.0.2)
capistrano (2.1.0, 2.0.0, 1.4.1)
cgi_multipart_eof_fix (2.5.0)
fastercsv (1.2.3)
fastthread (1.0.1)
fit (1.1)
fxri (0.3.6)
fxruby (1.6.13)
gem_plugin (0.2.3)
highline (1.4.0)
hoe (1.4.0)
hpricot (0.6)
htmlentities (4.0.0)
htmltools (1.10)
image_science (1.1.3)
json (1.1.2)
log4r (1.0.5)
mocha (0.5.6)
mongrel (1.1)
mongrel_cluster (1.0.5)
mongrel_service (0.3.4)
mysql (2.7.3)
needle (1.3.0)
net-sftp (1.1.0)
net-ssh (1.1.2)
rails (2.0.2, 2.0.1, 1.2.6, 1.2.5, 1.2.4, 1.2.3, 1.1.6)
railsbench (0.9.2)
rake (0.8.1)
rcov (0.8.1.2.0)
RedCloth (3.0.4)
redgreen (1.2.2)
rjb (1.1.1)
ropenlaszlo (0.4.1)
ruby-debug (0.10.0)
ruby-debug-base (0.10.0)
ruby-snarl (0.0.8)
rubyforge (0.4.4)
rubygems-update (1.0.1)
RubyInline (3.6.6)
rubyzip (0.9.1)
sources (0.0.1)
tattle (1.0.3)
text-format (1.0.0)
text-hyphen (1.0.0)
tzinfo (0.3.6)
watir (1.5.3)
win32-api (1.0.5)
win32-clipboard (0.4.3)
win32-dir (0.3.2)
win32-eventlog (0.4.7)
win32-file (0.5.5)
win32-file-stat (1.2.7)
win32-process (0.5.5)
win32-sapi (0.1.4)
win32-service (0.6.1, 0.5.2)
win32-sound (0.4.1)
win32console (1.0.8)
windows-api (0.2.0)
windows-pr (0.7.4)
ZenTest (3.7.2)
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Is nmake in your path?  If so, from your comments, it appears that 
*some* of your gem installs ARE compiling gems with whatever Platform 
SDK you have installed (looks like its Server 2003).

Luis can explain far better than I, but gems compiled with VC 8 are NOT 
compatible with the One Click installer (which is compiled with VC 6). 
Sure, they *might* run, but they''ll lead to trouble.

If you want to continue down this path, then the quickest way to get rid 
of the error messages you get is to install the VC 8 Runtime 
Redistributable. Don''t count on a stable system, though.

I feel your pain here. I develop mostly on Vista notebook. I keep both 
the OCI *and* Cygwin''s Ruby around. They both have their strengths and 
weaknesses, but until Ruby can be made to compile and function reliably 
with VC 8, I''ve found this to be the most stable mix (short of buying a
Mac or installing Linux).

=Will Green

Wes Gamble wrote:
> Some more information:
>
> (* using mongrel_rails start to startup *)
>
> Mongrel v. 0.3.13.3: No error dialog on startup
> Mongrel v. 1.0 - 1.1: Error dialog, click OK, mongrel proceeds
> Mongrel v >= 1.1.1: Error dialog, click OK, error dialog reappears, no 
> further progress can be made.
>
> All I have to do is modify Mongrel versions to get these behaviors.
>
> Does anyone know if MSVCR80.DLL is a standard part of the Microsoft 
> Platform SDK for Windows Server 2003 R2 distribution?  If so, then the 
> implication is I screwed up the installation somehow.
>
> What is the latest correct version of the Windows SDK on Windows XP SP2? 
> I may just try to move to that (although I''m trying to avoid that
- I
> will be forsaking the Windows platform for a MacBookPro as soon as they 
> announce the new models).
>
> Wes
>

On Jan 12, 2008 12:37 AM, Will Green <will at hotgazpacho.com>
wrote:
> Is nmake in your path?  If so, from your comments, it appears that
> *some* of your gem installs ARE compiling gems with whatever Platform
> SDK you have installed (looks like its Server 2003).
>
Oh, I think I overlooked at the comments done in this thread..

Yeah: if oyu have VC8/9 and Platform SDK in the Path, any gem that
output "Building native extension" legend during installation will
show up some serious problems.
> Luis can explain far better than I, but gems compiled with VC 8 are NOT
> compatible with the One Click installer (which is compiled with VC 6).
> Sure, they *might* run, but they''ll lead to trouble.
>
Yep. Exactly.

I''ll suggest you install a clean version of One-Click Installer
(latest is 1.8.6-26) and then install your gems in a clean
environment.

Ensure first you don''t have nmake or cl in your path. That will avoid
gems being compiled with VC8.

Anyway, if you had installed both VC8 and Platform SDK, you shouldn''t
see the missing runtime... unless you have some gem that wasn''t
compiled properly (which is possible).
> I''ve found this to be the most stable mix (short of buying a
> Mac or installing Linux).
>
A mac is expensive, and will not remove the whole pain of using
Ruby... check some of the Leopard nightmares around the web ;-)

HTH,
-- 
Luis Lavena
Multimedia systems
-
A common mistake that people make when trying to design
something completely foolproof is to underestimate
the ingenuity of complete fools.
Douglas Adams

> I''ll suggest you install a clean version of One-Click Installer
> (latest is 1.8.6-26) and then install your gems in a clean
> environment.
> 
> Ensure first you don''t have nmake or cl in your path. That will
avoid
> gems being compiled with VC8.
> 
This is kind of funny, because when rubygems 0.9.5 came out, it appeared 
that I was now _required_ to compile native gems on Windows and that is 
when I finally made sure that nmake would work to completion and 
actually compile stuff.  It sounds like you''re saying that I should
have
waited for the pre-compiled gems to get fixed :).
> A mac is expensive, and will not remove the whole pain of using
> Ruby... check some of the Leopard nightmares around the web ;-)
It''s true.  But given that, in my experience, many gem and plugin 
developers test little to not at all on Windows, the Mac is the 
"platform of least surprise".  Although I''ve been able to
solve all of
my Windows-specific Ruby issues eventually, I am just tired of having to 
spend time and energy doing that.

Wes
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

On Jan 12, 2008 3:48 PM, Wes Gamble <lists at ruby-forum.com>
wrote:
> > I''ll suggest you install a clean version of One-Click
Installer
> > (latest is 1.8.6-26) and then install your gems in a clean
> > environment.
> >
> > Ensure first you don''t have nmake or cl in your path. That
will avoid
> > gems being compiled with VC8.
> >
>
> This is kind of funny, because when rubygems 0.9.5 came out, it appeared
> that I was now _required_ to compile native gems on Windows and that is
> when I finally made sure that nmake would work to completion and
> actually compile stuff.  It sounds like you''re saying that I
should have
> waited for the pre-compiled gems to get fixed :).
>
Oh, no!

Please try upgrading rubygems to 1.0.1!!!

0.9.5 is broken for us (Windows users)!

I posted this a way back when Rails guys did the 2.dot Oh release:

http://blog.mmediasys.com/2007/12/19/latest-rubygems-and-rails-is-a-deadly-combo/

I worked a few hours with Eric Hodel getting this fixed before rubygems 1.0...

Please, update to it and the pain will go away :-D
> > A mac is expensive, and will not remove the whole pain of using
> > Ruby... check some of the Leopard nightmares around the web ;-)
>
> It''s true.  But given that, in my experience, many gem and plugin
> developers test little to not at all on Windows, the Mac is the
> "platform of least surprise".  Although I''ve been able
to solve all of
> my Windows-specific Ruby issues eventually, I am just tired of having to
> spend time and energy doing that.
>
"of least surprise" ... right :-)

I also like the "think different" motto and the just offer 2 (or one)
option to "be different". If you don''t do it "the mac
way", then you
should die... :-P

-- 
Luis Lavena
Multimedia systems
-
A common mistake that people make when trying to design
something completely foolproof is to underestimate
the ingenuity of complete fools.
Douglas Adams

Based on my testing, it appears to me there is something that Mongrel is 
loading that is requiring MSVCR80.dll, since 1.0.  Isn''t that correct?
> Oh, no!
> 
> Please try upgrading rubygems to 1.0.1!!!
> 
> 0.9.5 is broken for us (Windows users)!
> 
I''ve been on 1.0.1 for a while.  I''m on the
rubygems-developers list so
I see as soon as they post updates and I tend to upgrade immediately. 
So I ran into all the 0.9.5 problems and to try and fix it, I got my 
gems to compile on Windows.  But I''ve been off of 0.9.5 for a while.
> I also like the "think different" motto and the just offer 2 (or
one)
> option to "be different". If you don''t do it "the
mac way", then you
> should die... :-P
I know.  Honestly, I''ve enjoyed the "underdog" role of being
"the only
or one of few Windows guys in the room" at Ruby/Rails gathering to some 
degree.  And when I get the sense that there is Mac elitism at work, it 
really bugs me.  But, if I''m going to use Rails as a major tool in my 
work, it behooves me to make it as easy as possible for myself to 
develop.  Back when I was doing mostly Java work, it didn''t really 
matter that I was on Windows.

Wes
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Given all this, I''m starting to entertain using JRuby. It ships with 
NetBeans, and we *know* that we can compile with Java successfully...

=Will Green

On Jan 12, 2008 10:48 AM, Wes Gamble <lists at ruby-forum.com>
wrote:
> This is kind of funny, because when rubygems 0.9.5 came out, it appeared
> that I was now _required_ to compile native gems on Windows and that is
> when I finally made sure that nmake would work to completion and
> actually compile stuff.  It sounds like you''re saying that I
should have
> waited for the pre-compiled gems to get fixed :).
I had the same concern when 0.9.5 came out. I think what was missed
was the fact that only compiling with VC++6 would be safe with the OCI
installation. If you have VC++6 and nmake is compiling gems for you,
you should be fine. Or, make sure you''re not compiling gems.
That''s my
approach, at least.

-- 
Cheers,

Kevin Williams
http://www.bantamtech.com/

On Jan 12, 2008 5:06 PM, Will Green <will at hotgazpacho.com>
wrote:
> Given all this, I''m starting to entertain using JRuby. It ships
with
> NetBeans, and we *know* that we can compile with Java successfully...
>
Compile once, debug everywhere... :D
Hehehe, I remember the days back in 1997 when java was released :D

-- 
Luis Lavena
Multimedia systems
-
A common mistake that people make when trying to design
something completely foolproof is to underestimate
the ingenuity of complete fools.
Douglas Adams

On Jan 12, 2008 4:23 PM, Wes Gamble <lists at ruby-forum.com>
wrote:
> Based on my testing, it appears to me there is something that Mongrel is
> loading that is requiring MSVCR80.dll, since 1.0.  Isn''t that
correct?
>
No, all the version of mongrel are build with VC6, so the http11
extension is linked to MSVCRT.dll, and not MSVCR80.dll

can you try this on a IRB console?

irb(main):002:0> require ''rubygems''
=> true
irb(main):003:0> require ''mongrel''
=> true
irb(main):004:0> Mongrel::Const::MONGREL_VERSION
=> "1.1.2"

If you don''t get the msgbox in that process is because mongrel
isn''t
responsible for that. If you get, I''ll suggest you remove the mongrel
gem and clean install it again.
>
> I know.  Honestly, I''ve enjoyed the "underdog" role of
being "the only
> or one of few Windows guys in the room" at Ruby/Rails gathering to
some
> degree.  And when I get the sense that there is Mac elitism at work, it
> really bugs me.  But, if I''m going to use Rails as a major tool in
my
> work, it behooves me to make it as easy as possible for myself to
> develop.  Back when I was doing mostly Java work, it didn''t really
> matter that I was on Windows.
>
Since I started with Rails (back in 0.13) I didn''t have too many
troubles with it. Ruby, by itself, didn''t showed my troubles neither.
But some of the "popular libraries" have them, mostly because some
developers ignores other platforms (part of their elitism or
ignorance).

I use Rails on a daily basis to deploy to linux servers, all without
glitches (trust me: noone).

ssh to some server? no problem. have all your ssh keys? no problem
(pageant, putty ssh agent).

Anyway, I found no problems using Rails on Windows, except those
plugins from some developers that didn''t care about good/fair usage of
resources or the true nature of ruby a being cross-platform language.

-- 
Luis Lavena
Multimedia systems
-
A common mistake that people make when trying to design
something completely foolproof is to underestimate
the ingenuity of complete fools.
Douglas Adams

On Jan 12, 2008 5:07 PM, Kevin Williams <kevwil at gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Jan 12, 2008 10:48 AM, Wes Gamble <lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> > This is kind of funny, because when rubygems 0.9.5 came out, it
appeared
> > that I was now _required_ to compile native gems on Windows and that
is
> > when I finally made sure that nmake would work to completion and
> > actually compile stuff.  It sounds like you''re saying that I
should have
> > waited for the pre-compiled gems to get fixed :).
>
> I had the same concern when 0.9.5 came out. I think what was missed
> was the fact that only compiling with VC++6 would be safe with the OCI
> installation. If you have VC++6 and nmake is compiling gems for you,
> you should be fine. Or, make sure you''re not compiling gems.
That''s my
> approach, at least.
>
0.9.5 was using the pure-ruby version of the gems, that doesn''t mean
it was right.
Neither ruby compilation troubles where fixed :-P

-- 
Luis Lavena
Multimedia systems
-
A common mistake that people make when trying to design
something completely foolproof is to underestimate
the ingenuity of complete fools.
Douglas Adams

I found it.  Sigh.

Mongrel was trying to use fastthread 1.0.1 which apparently had been 
compiled with VC 8 (see below).  I''m pretty sure that fastthread is not
even necessary anymore - is that right?  When I removed the fastthread 
gem, it starts up fine.

Also, check out my VC8 polluted PATH entries:

C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\Common7\IDE;
C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\BIN;
C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\Common7\Tools;
C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\SDK\v2.0\bin;
C:\Program Files\Microsoft Platform SDK for Windows Server 2003 R2\Bin;
C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727;
C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\VCPackages;

(I got these because I installed the MSVC++ 2005 Express Edition at some 
point).

So...just to be clear, should these entries be banished from my PATH 
immediately (unless of course I decide to start developing VC++ :])?

Thanks for all of the help, guys.

Wes
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

On Jan 12, 2008 5:39 PM, Wes Gamble <lists at ruby-forum.com>
wrote:
> I found it.  Sigh.
>
> Mongrel was trying to use fastthread 1.0.1 which apparently had been
> compiled with VC 8 (see below).  I''m pretty sure that fastthread
is not
> even necessary anymore - is that right?  When I removed the fastthread
> gem, it starts up fine.
>
Aha!

that''s Rubygems 0.9.5 fault!

When you tried to install at some point mongrel with 0.9.5, rubygems
pulled fastthread source instead of the pre-compiled gem I made
available.

Anyway, if you''re using PATCHLEVEL above 36 you''re safe, if
not, you
need fastthread.

I suggest you update to latest One-Click Installer, do a gem update
--system and use it :-)
> Also, check out my VC8 polluted PATH entries:
>
> C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\Common7\IDE;
> C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\BIN;
> C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\Common7\Tools;
> C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\SDK\v2.0\bin;
> C:\Program Files\Microsoft Platform SDK for Windows Server 2003 R2\Bin;
> C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727;
> C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\VCPackages;
>
> (I got these because I installed the MSVC++ 2005 Express Edition at some
> point).
>
That''s why the gem installation process didn''t fail on you
since nmake
and cl.exe was available all the time!

I love to have my PATHs under control (yeah, I''m uscha  control freak)
;-)
Visual Studio made that impossible...
> So...just to be clear, should these entries be banished from my PATH
> immediately (unless of course I decide to start developing VC++ :])?
Maybe you can create a shortcut for the commandline version, like
previous Visual Studio versions did. Google for that and you will find
good resources about setvc, setvars or setvcvars (bat and cmd).
> Thanks for all of the help, guys.
No problem, I was worried that I broke something inside mongrel in
latest release! :P

Take care,

-- 
Luis Lavena
Multimedia systems
-
A common mistake that people make when trying to design
something completely foolproof is to underestimate
the ingenuity of complete fools.
Douglas Adams

Luis Lavena wrote:
> Anyway, if you''re using PATCHLEVEL above 36 you''re safe,
if not, you
> need fastthread.
You mean the patchlevel of ruby in the OCI gotten via ruby -v?

Wes
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

On Jan 12, 2008 6:20 PM, Wes Gamble <lists at ruby-forum.com>
wrote:
> Luis Lavena wrote:
> > Anyway, if you''re using PATCHLEVEL above 36 you''re
safe, if not, you
> > need fastthread.
>
> You mean the patchlevel of ruby in the OCI gotten via ruby -v?
Yep, sorry about that:
>ruby -e "puts RUBY_PATCHLEVEL"
111
>ruby -v
ruby 1.8.6 (2007-09-24 patchlevel 111) [i386-mswin32]

-- 
Luis Lavena
Multimedia systems
-
A common mistake that people make when trying to design
something completely foolproof is to underestimate
the ingenuity of complete fools.
Douglas Adams