[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

Gem question: "win32" vs. "ruby"

Jeff

11/29/2006 5:02:00 AM

Often when I install a new gem, or try to update a gem I already have,
I'll be presented with a list of choices for which version I want to
install.

And often I see two entries with the same version number, but one will
say "(win32)" after it, and the other will say "(ruby)". I assume if
I'm on WinXP, I should choose the win32 version - but why? What's the
difference?

And so if there is *not* a win32 version, is it ok to install the
"ruby" version on a Windows system? For example, the latest Mongrel
gem (0.3.13.4) does not have a win32 equivalent.

Thanks
Jeff
21 Answers

Jano Svitok

11/29/2006 8:35:00 AM

0

On 11/29/06, Jeff <cohen.jeff@gmail.com> wrote:
> Often when I install a new gem, or try to update a gem I already have,
> I'll be presented with a list of choices for which version I want to
> install.
>
> And often I see two entries with the same version number, but one will
> say "(win32)" after it, and the other will say "(ruby)". I assume if
> I'm on WinXP, I should choose the win32 version - but why? What's the
> difference?
>
> And so if there is *not* a win32 version, is it ok to install the
> "ruby" version on a Windows system? For example, the latest Mongrel
> gem (0.3.13.4) does not have a win32 equivalent.
>
> Thanks
> Jeff

Hi,

the difference is when the gem contains compiled extension. On other
platforms, it is assumed that you have a compiler installed by
default, so gem can compile the extension without problems. On
windows, no compiler is installed normally. To work around that,
-win32 gems contain precompiled extension.

You can use the not-precompiled gem provided you have the compiler
installed (best and most safe one is the one that was used to compile
ruby itself, in the case of one click it is VC6) and you have set up
the compile environment vars (i.e. run vcvars32 before running gem
install).

In the case of mongrel, I'm not sure if 0.3.13.4 works on windows. To
check see mongrel-users mailing list archive on rubyforge. There is a
newer version in works that is almost done, but they are finishing the
win32 part (it's like 0.3.18 or 0.3.19). You can fetch it from
'prereleases' repository, gem install mongrel --source
http://mongrel.rubyforge.or..., but read the mailing list
archive before you do. 0.3.13 is the latest stable for win32.

Jeff

11/29/2006 7:02:00 PM

0


Jan Svitok wrote:
> the difference is when the gem contains compiled extension. On other
> platforms, it is assumed that you have a compiler installed by
> default, so gem can compile the extension without problems. On
> windows, no compiler is installed normally. To work around that,
> -win32 gems contain precompiled extension.
>

Awesome... thanks Jan, that makes total sense now.

Jeff

Rich

12/28/2011 4:39:00 AM

0


Mark S:
> I have to disagree. What's wrong with giving consumers a big shot of
> Wand at a discount price? I'm sure this represents what today's market
> will bear.

Let me ask you this- was there ever a corresponding price drop in the
LP days?
Also, these sets that are dumped on the market for pennies- do you
think that it somehow diminishes the work of the artist?

Rich (who will probably buy the Wand box)

mark

12/28/2011 5:02:00 AM

0

On Dec 27, 8:38 pm, Rich <chongk...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Mark S:
>
> > I have to disagree. What's wrong with giving consumers a big shot of
> > Wand at a discount price? I'm sure this represents what today's market
> > will bear.
>
>  Let me ask you this- was there ever a corresponding price drop in the
> LP days?
> Also, these sets that are dumped on the market for pennies- do you
> think that it somehow diminishes the work of the artist?
>
> Rich (who will probably buy the Wand box)

I remember picking up Toscanini LPs for as little as $1.99. Victrola
with pretty shabby mastering and cheap vinyl in those pastel-ish
covers. One gets a much better product on CDs these days as one isn't
dealing with a needle picking up the sound.

And, no, I don't think selling them for pennies diminishes the work of
the artist. That seems odd to me that you'd think that. If the exact
same recording is released at a budget price does the performance
suddenly become crap? All of these recordings were issued at full
price, stayed there for as long as they could and are now making the
traditional trip down "lower asking price lane." It's water seeking
its level. I think Wand's final recordings were made 10 years ago (he
died in 2002). He never had the sales figures to compete with the Sony
& BMG conductors who recorded for those labels over a long period -
Bernstein, Reiner et al. His recorded rep on BMG was quite limited in
its scope.

This is nothing unusual. The majors are discounting tons of older
classical product. Who knows, it may be the last hurrah before they
stop CD production altogether and offer classical only as downloads.
Get them while you can and be happy they're so cheap.

Let me ask you: do you think they'd sell more copies of this Wand set
by selling it at full price?

Oscar Williamson

12/28/2011 5:18:00 AM

0

On Dec 27, 10:38 pm, Rich wrote:
>
>  Let me ask you this- was there ever a corresponding price drop in the
> LP days?
> Also, these sets that are dumped on the market for pennies- do you
> think that it somehow diminishes the work of the artist?

Definitely not. And this set is priced 82 hard dollars. That is not
tomb-looting, in my book at least.

Rich

12/28/2011 5:38:00 AM

0

> I remember picking up Toscanini LPs for as little as $1.99. Victrola
> with pretty shabby mastering and cheap vinyl in those pastel-ish
> covers. One gets a much better product on CDs these days as one isn't
> dealing with a needle picking up the sound.
>
And I remember buying one LP..one LP because that's all I could
afford, and it didn't sit on shelf. I played it over and over. Then I
dreamed about the next LP.... Nowadays there's an attitude-and I'm not
saying it's your attitude Mark .."Oh, yeah I have that edition (all 80
cds)...it's ok. You can buy it at blowitoutyourass for 40 dollars."

Rich

mark

12/28/2011 6:09:00 AM

0

On Dec 27, 9:37 pm, Rich <chongk...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > I remember picking up Toscanini LPs for as little as $1.99. Victrola
> > with pretty shabby mastering and cheap vinyl in those pastel-ish
> > covers. One gets a much better product on CDs these days as one isn't
> > dealing with a needle picking up the sound.
>
>  And I remember buying one LP..one LP because that's all I could
> afford, and  it didn't sit on shelf. I played it over and over. Then I
> dreamed about the next LP.... Nowadays there's an attitude-and I'm not
> saying it's your attitude Mark .."Oh, yeah I have that edition (all 80
> cds)...it's ok. You can buy it at blowitoutyourass for 40 dollars."
>
> Rich

If somebody is having a hard time making ends meet, the last thing
they should be doing is buying CDs.

We all have nostalgia for the good old LP days, but our listening
options are so much more expanded these days. One could always go to
the library and take of LPs if one couldn't afford them. That's what I
did as a teen. I also listened to WCLV radio out of Cleveland.

Today, one can listen to literally hundreds of classical music
stations for free on their computer through streaming video. One can
watch untold number of classical videos on YouTube. In our neck of the
woods, one can watch classical videos on the TC on Classic Arts
Showcase. You can Tivo the show and watch it at your leisure.There are
lots of ways to get free classical music or nearly free. Buying CDs is
actually a luxury when you think about it.

When it comes to the price of recorded media, that $1.99 I paid for
Toscanini LPs back in 1972 is equal to over $10 in today's dollars
adjusted for inflation. One can purchase quality CDs from major labels
for around $3 a pop today, which equates to about 35¢ in 1972 dollars.
That means that budget CDs TODAY cost about a THIRD of what they sold
for on LP in 1972, and today's CDs hold at least twice as much music.
So on the one hand, you're correct that music is being discounted at
much lower rates than it was in LP days, but that's just the way it
goes in this age of media saturation and waning interest in classical
music.

Rich

12/28/2011 6:40:00 AM

0

> We all have nostalgia for the good old LP days, but our listening
> options are so much more expanded these days.

It just seems a little sad that the combined work and experience of
so many fine artists and technicians ends up in a slim box for
19.95. But of course if I feel poorly about the low price I can
always order from Japan.
Rich

Gerard

12/28/2011 9:09:00 AM

0

Rich <chongkil9@comcast.net> typed:
> > I remember picking up Toscanini LPs for as little as $1.99. Victrola
> > with pretty shabby mastering and cheap vinyl in those pastel-ish
> > covers. One gets a much better product on CDs these days as one
> > isn't dealing with a needle picking up the sound.
> >
> And I remember buying one LP..one LP because that's all I could
> afford, and it didn't sit on shelf. I played it over and over. Then I
> dreamed about the next LP.... Nowadays there's an attitude-and I'm not
> saying it's your attitude Mark .."Oh, yeah I have that edition (all 80
> cds)...it's ok. You can buy it at blowitoutyourass for 40 dollars."
>
> Rich

That kind of devaluation is for sure.
The "emotional" value of a LP or CD you only could acquire after saving money,
because it was something you hardly could afford, is almost the opposite of that
"value" when it comes in a 80 disc box - costing $85 - with everything by (e.g.)
Karajan.
The first type was a real acquisition, made after thinking, selecting, thinking
again, being sure that you _really_ wanted it.
The second type is like "I don't need it, but I'm sure there must be something
good in it, and why not? - it costs next to nothing - the money is no problem".
In many cases ending in a box one has not listened to (not to all recordings).

Johannes Roehl

12/28/2011 9:56:00 AM

0

Am 28.12.2011 06:02, schrieb Mark S:
> On Dec 27, 8:38 pm, Rich<chongk...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Mark S:
>>
>>> I have to disagree. What's wrong with giving consumers a big shot of
>>> Wand at a discount price? I'm sure this represents what today's market
>>> will bear.
>>
>> Let me ask you this- was there ever a corresponding price drop in the
>> LP days?
>> Also, these sets that are dumped on the market for pennies- do you
>> think that it somehow diminishes the work of the artist?

....

conductors who recorded for those labels over a long period -
> Bernstein, Reiner et al. His recorded rep on BMG was quite limited in
> its scope.
>
> This is nothing unusual. The majors are discounting tons of older
> classical product. Who knows, it may be the last hurrah before they
> stop CD production altogether and offer classical only as downloads.
> Get them while you can and be happy they're so cheap.
>
> Let me ask you: do you think they'd sell more copies of this Wand set
> by selling it at full price?

of course not.
Most of Wand's studio recordings from the '70ties and '80ties have been
"mid-priced" since their first CD incarnations in about 1990. I remember
this quite well as they were among the only separately available
Bruckner CDs at a decent price at this time when I started listening to
this stuff as a teenager. For the studio NDR Brahms cycle (3 discs) I
think I paid about 40 Deutsche Mark around this time (which was slightly
more than one full priced CD which were about 30-35 DM back then).
At least in Germany most of this stuff (not the later live recordings)
has been available for mid-price or (often) less for almost 20 years. So
anything but super-budget would be quite implausible.