Asp Forum - Ruby/Tk and OS X--deployment question

Kevin Walzer

3/20/2007 8:47:00 PM

I'm learning GUI programming with Ruby/Tk on Mac OS X (10.4.9). How does
one deploy standalone Ruby applications on OS X, especially if you are
not using Ruby-Cocoa? Is there a tool like py2app (Python) that gathers
up the libraries and frameworks and scripts and generates a standalone
app bundle?

6 Answers

Ara.T.Howard

3/20/2007 8:58:00 PM

Morton Goldberg

3/21/2007 2:43:00 AM

On Mar 20, 2007, at 4:58 PM, ara.t.howard@noaa.gov wrote:

> On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Kevin Walzer wrote:
>
>> I'm learning GUI programming with Ruby/Tk on Mac OS X (10.4.9).
>> How does one
>> deploy standalone Ruby applications on OS X, especially if you are
>> not using
>> Ruby-Cocoa? Is there a tool like py2app (Python) that gathers up the
>> libraries and frameworks and scripts and generates a standalone
>> app bundle?
>
> google rubyscript2exe.

Although the RubyScript2Exe website mentions OS X support, it seems
to be very experimental. How well does it work on OS X?. Can you make
a double-clickable .app package with it?

I have been able to use Automator to make a Finder launchable app
that runs a Ruby/Tk script. I was even able to install my own Finder
icons (.icns) into it. Doing it with Automator is somewhat kludgy and
the resulting package has about a 220 KB footprint, but process is
simple and reliable.

Regards, Morton

Dave Baldwin

3/21/2007 8:39:00 AM

On 20 Mar 2007, at 20:50, Kevin Walzer wrote:

> I'm learning GUI programming with Ruby/Tk on Mac OS X (10.4.9). How
> does one deploy standalone Ruby applications on OS X, especially if
> you are not using Ruby-Cocoa? Is there a tool like py2app (Python)
> that gathers up the libraries and frameworks and scripts and
> generates a standalone app bundle?
>

http://www.sveinbjorn.or...

Dave.

Bugman

8/7/2007 1:06:00 PM

"GoMavs" <Mav@ericks.com> wrote in message
news:ENZti.8738$J13.8134@trnddc02...
>
> "P.Henry" <P.Henery@revolution.org> wrote in message
> news:fc509olkwl19.vgeongdtvc0z.dlg@40tude.net...
>> On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 12:23:08 GMT, GoMavs wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.washingtontimes.com:80/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070807/NATION/1080...
>>
>> LOL! The moonie times?
>>
>> You guys have absolutely nothing. 08 Is going to be a blood bath for you
>> cons.
>
> Stephen Dinan is a liberal and is pro fixing the environment...
>
> Are you saying he blatantly lied about the carbon footprint of Democrats?
>
> Would you kindly read the article and tell me what part of it is lies
> since they are all Democratic admissions...
>
> "Former Sen. John Edwards' 2008 presidential campaign has paid nearly
> $22,000 to offset its global-warming emissions this year, including more
> than $5,000 a month from April through June, making him the candidate with
> the largest acknowledged output of greenhouse gases."
>
> Was that a blatant lie?
>
> Also would you say any media labeled liberal or owned by a liberal is not
> a good source?

Are you saying liberals pollute more than conservatives?

George W. Stalin

8/7/2007 1:12:00 PM

"Bugman" <jmposing@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OpidnWMj6J6p8yXbnZ2dnUVZ_tGonZ2d@giganews.com...
>
> "GoMavs" <Mav@ericks.com> wrote in message
> news:ENZti.8738$J13.8134@trnddc02...
>>
>> "P.Henry" <P.Henery@revolution.org> wrote in message
>> news:fc509olkwl19.vgeongdtvc0z.dlg@40tude.net...
>>> On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 12:23:08 GMT, GoMavs wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://www.washingtontimes.com:80/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070807/NATION/1080...
>>>
>>> LOL! The moonie times?
>>>
>>> You guys have absolutely nothing. 08 Is going to be a blood bath for you
>>> cons.
>>
>> Stephen Dinan is a liberal and is pro fixing the environment...
>>
>> Are you saying he blatantly lied about the carbon footprint of Democrats?
>>
>> Would you kindly read the article and tell me what part of it is lies
>> since they are all Democratic admissions...
>>
>> "Former Sen. John Edwards' 2008 presidential campaign has paid nearly
>> $22,000 to offset its global-warming emissions this year, including more
>> than $5,000 a month from April through June, making him the candidate
>> with the largest acknowledged output of greenhouse gases."
>>
>> Was that a blatant lie?
>>
>> Also would you say any media labeled liberal or owned by a liberal is not
>> a good source?
>
> Are you saying liberals pollute more than conservatives?

'08 is like an IED for the childish republicans. It'll blow them into the
next world forever.

Barack Hussein Osama Bin Laden

8/7/2007 1:23:00 PM

"P.Henry" <P.Henery@revolution.org> wrote in message
news:fc509olkwl19.vgeongdtvc0z.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 12:23:08 GMT, GoMavs wrote:
>
>> http://www.washingtontimes.com:80/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070807/NATION/1080...
>
> Damn, democraps are big hypocritical mothe fuckers all right
>
========

No shit.

Article published Aug 7, 2007
Roads to '08 leaving footprint

August 7, 2007

By Stephen Dinan - Former Sen. John Edwards' 2008 presidential campaign has
paid nearly $22,000 to offset its global-warming emissions this year,
including more than $5,000 a month from April through June, making him the
candidate with the largest acknowledged output of greenhouse gases.

Meanwhile, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign spent $2,367 to offset its
emissions for April alone, while Sen. Christopher J. Dodd paid $650 for his
presidential campaign's emissions from April through June.

Together, they are the three campaign pioneers in the new world of carbon
neutrality: the idea of "offsetting" their greenhouse-gas emissions by
paying a third-party company to plant trees, build clean-energy projects or
take other steps that will lead to less carbon dioxide being emitted.

Presidential campaigns, it turns out, are a dirty business, environmentally
speaking - and for the first time, the campaigns' Federal Election
Commission reports are providing a glimpse of just how dirty they are when
it comes to greenhouse-gas emissions.

In short, Mr. Edwards' acknowledged "carbon footprint" is at least double
the size of Mrs. Clinton's, and the comparison prompts the question of
whether he is dirtier, or whether she is less diligent in figuring out what
her campaign is emitting.

At $12 a ton - the rate she pays to Native Energy, her chosen offsets
provider - Mrs. Clinton's payment amounts to almost 200 metric tons of
carbon-dioxide emissions for April alone.

Mr. Edwards, who also uses Native Energy, emitted nearly 450 tons a month in
April, May and June, judging by his own $16,146 payment his campaign says he
made on July 11. He had made an earlier $5,850 payment on March 30.

By comparison, the average American's emissions for an entire year runs
about 20 metric tons, while the average European's emissions comes to about
10 tons.

All three Democrats have touted their efforts on the campaign trail.

Mr. Edwards went first, announcing in March that at the time "we're the only
campaign in either party to make the carbon-neutral pledge." Mrs. Clinton
followed the next month, timing her pledge to coincide with Earth Day.

But it's tougher to evaluate how well they are living up to their pledges.
Campaign-finance reports give only a snapshot of the campaigns' efforts, and
the picture is clouded by the traditional secrecy that surrounds campaigns.

While Mr. Dodd's campaign provided a near-complete breakdown of his carbon
emissions for one month, neither Mrs. Clinton nor Mr. Edwards would give
details of what they cover or what they emit.

Those who track the issue say disclosure is the key to judging who is living
up to the pledge.

"When someone is running for office, I think voters appreciate transparency,
and I think voters appreciate actions more than words," said Julia Bovey, a
spokeswoman for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) Action Fund. "I
would hope that any candidate who claims a commitment to cutting back on
global-warming pollution is also open to talking about what they're doing."

The NRDC Action Fund, the political arm of the nonprofit environmental
group, issued a challenge in February to all of the candidates, asking them
to run carbon-neutral campaigns.

The fund promised to help any candidate who accepted the challenge by
offering expertise on revamping their energy use, but so far none has taken
the fund up on its offer.

"Any of the big environmental nonprofits would be more than happy to serve
an advisory role on this issue of how to create less pollution," Ms. Bovey
said. "That offer still stands, and that would also help give some
transparency to this process."

Without the campaigns providing figures, it's difficult to measure their
efforts. Some campaigns are far larger than others, some travel more than
others, and travel makes up the largest chunk of emissions.

One independent yardstick could be President Bush's travels on Air Force
One, which a Web site, heliumreport.com, estimated could be offset for
$200,000 a year. Mr. Bush takes fewer trips than candidates, but flies a
much bigger aircraft.

For another measure, a business-travel services organization has estimated
large businesses should expect offsets for air travel to run between 1
percent and 2 percent of a ticket's price. With travel costs running half a
million dollars or more per quarter, that means the big campaigns should
expect to spend as much as $50,000 a year to offset flights alone.

Mr. Dodd's campaign released the most details, giving a near-complete
picture of actual emissions for May: 1.85 metric tons for hotels and car
rentals; 6.24 tons for commercial airplane flights; 0.4 metric tons for two
hybrid cars; and 3.78 metric tons for office space. The campaign said it
paid for, but didn't have available, the exact amount of emissions for
computer use.

Mr. Dodd's spokesman, Hari Sevugan, said their actual bill for May came to
$67.50, but they paid $200 to cover just-in-case costs.

"If people are doing stuff for the campaign from home, for example, this
would help cover that," he said.

The campaign uses Carbon Fund, which charged $5 per metric ton to offset
emissions, or $7 less than charged by Native Energy, the company chosen by
Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Edwards.

Mr. Dodd also spent $67,642 on charter flights with Air Charter Team Inc.,
which includes carbon offsets in its prices.

Steve Davison, vice president of marketing for Air Charter Team, said it
calculates emissions by gallons of fuel used per flight, and plugs that into
a formula based on the type of aircraft used to come up with an emissions
total for each flight.

Mr. Davison would not say how much that amounts to for Mr. Dodd: "We don't
really talk about our clients to the press."

No Republican candidate has pledged to achieve carbon neutrality - not even
Sen. John McCain, the Arizona Republican who has sponsored almost every
major piece of global-warming legislation over the past few years.

Brooke Buchanan, a campaign spokeswoman, said they have asked for a company
to study the campaign"s carbon footprint and come up with offsets, but she
was unable to provide the name of the company, when the study was contracted
or when it will be done.

"We started it earlier this year, and we're just waiting to hear back from
them soon," she said. "They're right in the middle of it, so we look forward
to hearing the outcomes of this study."

Mr. McCain's spending records don't record a payment to any of the major
offsets companies.

His spokeswoman said the campaign has bought energy-efficient computers and
lights and has asked the landlord at the building that houses its
headquarters to turn off the air conditioning when the office isn't in use.

Colleen Murray, Mr. Edwards' spokeswoman, said the Edwards campaign also
controls and conserves energy from lights, heating and computers, and "have
thousands of local volunteers working together on community-service
activities, including weatherizing homes and distributing energy-efficient
compact fluorescent bulbs across the country."

"Our campaign takes offsetting our carbon footprint very seriously. That is
why we have taken many voluntary steps to improve the environment, including
purchasing carbon offsets for the travel of Senator and Elizabeth Edwards
and all staff members that travel with them, and for energy used in our
headquarters and all field offices," she said.

Bill Connelly, a spokesman for Native Energy, said that when they are
contacted, they take a look at how clients can reduce what they use and help
them track the rest to calculate offsets.

"We do an inventory of emissions. We take a look at all of their
carbon-dioxide impact," he said. "The primary source of emissions is
typically travel, usually air travel, and then we look at all of the other
ways they use energy."

He said he could not discuss particular clients' energy use or offsets
without their permission, which he said he did not have.

Former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack was the first presidential candidate to pledge
neutrality on Feb. 13, the same day NRDC issued its challenge, but he folded
his campaign little more than a week later, citing financial challenges.
Campaign-finance records show he never made any payments to Native Energy,
the carbon-offsets broker he chose.

Sen. Barack Obama, the candidate running closest to Mrs. Clinton in the
Democratic presidential-nomination race, does not pay for offsets, but he
does use Air Charter Team, the same company Mr. Dodd uses, which offsets
emissions through Carbon Fund. Mr. Obama's campaign listed $702,802 paid to
Air Charter in the last period.

His campaign did not respond to calls for comment on his carbon footprint.

Some critics said the responsibility goes deeper than just paying a company
to offset energy usage.

"The question is not how much they've paid, nor indeed the amount of carbon
dioxide they've emitted, but what they're actually doing about it - what the
offsets mean," said Iain Murray, senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise
Institute. "You have to ask - if you believe that offsets are actually doing
some good, then what is it those offsets are paying for?"

At Native Energy, those projects include wind-based energy projects and
systems to capture methane from cow manure on farms and use it to produce
electricity.

Ben & Jerry's and the Dave Matthews Band have both used Native Energy to
offset carbon emissions, and former Vice President Al Gore used the company
to offset emissions that stemmed from making his global-warming documentary
"An Inconvenient Truth."

Mr. Gore's offsets helped build a methane project on the Dovan family farm
in Berlin, Pa., that captures methane from 450 cows. It will eliminate
nearly 30,000 tons of emissions over the project's 20-year lifetime,
according to Native Energy.

The Clinton Global Initiative, a project of Mrs. Clinton's husband, former
President Bill Clinton, paid Native Energy to help American Indians build a
wind-energy project to offset the 1,000 tons of emissions generated by its
2005 inaugural meeting.

comp.lang.ruby

Ruby/Tk and OS X--deployment question