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


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

How to run Ruby on 64-bit Windows?

bdezonia

7/30/2008 7:54:00 PM

Is there a way to get a precompiled binary or compile Ruby for 64-bit
Windows?
6 Answers

bdezonia

7/30/2008 8:30:00 PM

0

I just tried installing the OneClickInstaller assuming its 32 bit and
it installed. When I run a simple test it seemed to work. Am I
confused here? Can installing via the OneClickInstaller run Ruby
successfully on 64 bit Windows 2003 Server?

On Jul 30, 2:54 pm, bdezo...@wisc.edu wrote:
> Is there a way to get a precompiled binary or compile Ruby for 64-bit
> Windows?

Daniel Vartanov

7/31/2008 3:50:00 AM

0

Which exactly problem do you have with one-click-installer on 64-bit
Windows? I tried to install on 64-bit WinXP and got success.

Alex Shulgin

7/31/2008 8:07:00 AM

0

On Jul 30, 11:29 pm, bdezo...@wisc.edu wrote:
> I just tried installing the OneClickInstaller assuming its 32 bit and
> it installed. When I run a simple test it seemed to work. Am I
> confused here? Can installing via the OneClickInstaller run Ruby
> successfully on 64 bit Windows 2003 Server?

It can and should work w/o any problem, since any 32-bit Windows
executable can run seamlessly on 64-bit Windows. But the process is
run in the emulation mode (search for 'WOW64' on the web).

Do you think you really need native 64-bit compiled ruby interpreter?

--
Regards,
Alex

bdezonia

7/31/2008 4:03:00 PM

0

> Do you think you really need native 64-bit compiled ruby interpreter?

No. I assumed 32 bit apps would not work. I'm glad Ruby does. Thanks.

Li Wan

7/23/2009 3:33:00 AM

0

Tom McDonald wrote:

> I'm curious as to why you would expect an alluvial fan at the mouth of
> the Murray, instead of the dune-like barrier island(s) of the
> Coorong?
>
> Look at a river with a similar average flow rate, the Perdido River
> that forms the western border between the American states of Alabama
> and Florida. (On Google Maps, I found many similar situations with
> other rivers; but the Perdido, as I mentioned, carries a roughly
> equivalent amount of water to the Murray.)
>
> The mouth of the Perdido looks a lot like the mouth of the Murray,
> with a bay behind long, dune-like islands. I wonder what mechanism,
> other than mining, you think explains the situation at the mouth of
> the Perdido? Or do you think that most/all of these landforms are due
> to mining?

The Murray river is unlike the Perido in that the Murry river has an
undersea canyon twice as deep as the Grand Canyon. This indicates
something very special happened here. We cannot discount large scale
aboriginal sand mining operations being the cause of this.

See the canyon for yourself:
http://www.ga.gov.au/servlet/BigObjFileManager?bigob...

> As for your references to alluvial fans, they refer to the outflow of
> rivers onto plains, not into the sea. Seas often have currents that
> run across the mouths of rivers, carrying sand, etc, along the coast,
> rather than straight out to sea. This results in what we see at the
> mouth of the Perdido, and at the mouth of the Murray.

The sand barriers in the Coorong are very definitely man made. They are
the basal remnants of a very large accreted sand dam structure. It
probably broke circa 5000 BP creating a huge scouring outflow which
carved the canyons into the sea floor.

The massive outflow at the time the dam broke even removed the heavy
mineral sands which the aboriginal people had been mining. Since the
mineral sands had gone, the dam was not longer maintained and it
quickly weathered to its current state.

Today, all around the Coorong there is evidence of the aboriginals
processing seashells to create lime. There are large piles of
unprocessed shells abounding in the region.

One can only postulate on the nature of the catastrophe. Perhaps it was
a tsunami originating in the Southern Ocean, or a perhaps it was a mega
La Nina event.

HTH




--

Li Wan

7/23/2009 4:06:00 PM

0

#
Path: textnews.cambrium.nl!feeder2.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!138.195.8.3.MISMATCH!news.ecp.fr!aioe.org!not-for-mail
From: "Li Wan" <liwan@live.com>
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology,soc.history.ancient,alt.history.ancient-worlds,sci.geo.geology,soc.history.what-if
Subject: Re: How long until the EXPERTS admit the Alluvial Fan that should be found at the Mouth of the River Murray in South Australia is missing
Followup-To: sci.archaeology
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 16:05:32 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <h4a1ob$mrq$1@aioe.org>
References: <e934ce56-824a-4fd1-8e62-8b14b6131fca@f20g2000prn.googlegroups.com> <1413e7bf-c341-436d-88db-2315adff2a7b@m11g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> <h48llt$73r$1@aioe.org> <27f6b0f7-420a-43e9-a58d-cc3391fa55bc@g1g2000pra.googlegroups.com> <234f611d-12d4-48ad-a2bd-753ab4a6a0df@q40g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: HBwJd3Pz5J7HST2pzXVnPg.user.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.7.9
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 090722-0, 22/07/2009), Outbound message
Cancel-Lock: sha1:qDZUoS7uXqZ75sdQulg9NUkD818=
User-Agent: XanaNews/1.18.1.6
Xref: textnews.cambrium.nl sci.archaeology:117164 soc.history.ancient:88379 alt.history.ancient-worlds:3060 sci.geo.geology:73994 soc.history.what-if:148845

kangarooistan wrote:

> HI Li Wan
>
> Thanks for your thought mate , are you familiar with the site ??

I have done many expeditions with Google Earth and I have seen Storm
Boy.

> > The sand barriers in the Coorong are very definitely man made. They
> > are the basal remnants of a very large accreted sand dam structure.
> > It probably broke circa 5000 BP creating a huge scouring outflow
> > which carved the canyons into the sea floor.
>
> The area has definitely been mined by Aboriginal peoples on a VAST
> scale , that judging by the deposition rates seen in the thousands of
> Middens adjacent the vast site , was very much increased about the
> same time as the Bronze age ,

It does not make economic sense for the aboriginals to be shipping
unprocessed mineral sands. The aboriginals would have been doing
secondary processing (refining and smelting) before shippment.

The huge mountains of so called 'middens' are obviously input into
their smelting and refinging processes.

A substantial harbour infrastructure would have been needed to handle
the trade.
Have you identified the location of the harbour yet? Port CoorongAmun
would be a good name for it.