[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software

Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

RMagick error: " no such file to load -- RMagick"

jeljer te Wies

3/23/2009 12:07:00 AM

Hee people (again today :P) ...

So I want to use RMagick but it doesn't work ...
I installed it as told in the FAQ of the site of RMagick
(http://rmagick.rubyforge.org/instal...)

1) sudo port install tiff -macosx imagemagick +q8 +gs +wmf
2) sudo gem install rmagick

I didn't get any problems or warning !....

so when I try to run my verry complicated program:

require 'RMagick'

I get the following error: no such file to load -- RMagick

So I googled (of course)... but spelling it different doesn't help. I
tried:
Rmagick
rMagick
RMagick
rmagick

And when I do in the console:
$ irb
>> require 'rmagick'
=> true
>>

This seams to work ! .. (so it is installed)

There are a lot of people with these problems on the net.. but they
didn't give me a solution
thanxs !
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-....

4 Answers

Serabe

3/23/2009 12:11:00 AM

0

Try:

require "rubygems"
require "RMagick"

Cheers,

Serabe

--
http://www....

jeljer te Wies

3/23/2009 12:23:00 AM

0

Serabe wrote:
> Try:
>
> require "rubygems"
> require "RMagick"
>
> Cheers,
>
> Serabe

PFF !...
I have been programming ruby/rails for over a year now ...
stupid that i didn't thought of that !

thanxs mate
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-....

topaz

7/14/2011 6:21:00 AM

0

On Jul 13, 10:05 am, moonpie <mr_rc_moon...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> John:
>
> >> Part of the reason that Williams does not feature the Iraq death count
> >> is that Obama has made serious progress in withdrawing troops from
> >> this country, trying to undo one of Bush's greatest catastrophes.
>
> Again and again and again, excuses and blame denial from you, always
> pointing the finger to the right in EVERY SINGLE CASE, and always
> excusing the left, in every single case.
>
>  Keep arguing that you're not a liberal but I can pretty much sum up
> your entire political agenda with four words:
>
> GOP BAD WEALTHY BAD
>
> and I'm just tired of hearing it.
>
> So, I'm done. You are like talking to a self-righteous brick wall. No
> matter what anybody says, you CANNOT ACCEPT ANY BLAME FOR THE LEFT.
>
> Have a nice day.
>
> back to Topaz:
>
>
>
>
>
> >The housing/real estate crash  was caused by greed and ignorance at
> >several levels, all the way from the level of the CEOs down to the man
> >on the street who bought too much house.
> >What is often ignored is the role Congress had to play and the
> >concept in Congress  years before  that the dream of home ownership
> >really    should be available even for those who were not financially
> >that stable.
>
> >The big banks are more fun to attack in the media, as well as Fannie
> >and Freddie.
> >It is less fun to pick on  a bus driver who bought too much house.
>
> >We are loiving in a society where people  want the 40,000   dollar
> >SUV and are maxed out on their credit cards rather than admit  they
> >are living too high on the hog.  People are forgetting how to save
> >money.
>
> the other side of the coin here is that some people ARE starting to
> save a lot of money, instead of spending it... which means less money
> going into the Fed coffers as sales tax revenue, contributing to the
> too-much-going-out-not-enough-coming in problem.
>
> Every one of these issues is a huge double-edged sword, neither party
> will accept blame for the part they created, and both parties simply
> point the finger and dream up legislation that will "fix" only half
> the problem.
>
> Corporate taxes, for example. Both sides present ridiculous fuzzy math
> to "prove" their theories.
>
> Two schools of thought in Washington - Republicans - corporate taxes
> in other countries are much lower than they are in America, therefore,
> they should be lowered in america, to attract foreign corporations to
> open offices in america, and create jobs. Good theory - if it would
> work.
>
> Democrats will argue thats simply another tax break for the wealthy,
> and in 10 years of Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, no real new jobs
> were created. Therefore, corporate taxes should be raised.
>
> the republicans continue to argue that keeping expenses lower for the
> business class creates investment opportunities for them which creates
> employment - democrats argue that it can, but usually doesnt, and the
> business class doesnt invest, they simply dump the money into
> off-shore tax shelters.
>
> Personally I think both sides are right, and both sides are wrong, and
> both sides hold up straw men arguments to "prove" their theories.
>
>
>
> >Plenty of blame too for S and P rating organization, Moody's, the
> >little mortgage brokers etc.   And let us not forget those Credit
> >Default Swaps, a financial concept that should have never been allowed
> >in the first place  and the bets that Goldman Sachs took in the
> >markets that they would collapse.
>
> yeah by all accounts, some of the banking industry ran amok for the
> last ten years or so, thats probably more fault of
> republican-sponsored de-regulation than the democrats. But the
> democrats are hardly blameless as well.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I agree with much of what you have said. I am still waiting for
Obama's plan (from his campaign) to stop sending jobs overseas.
Another campaign promise unfulfilled.

Well he kept one promise...to destroy our health care system as we
know it. He should have concentrated on creating jobs first.

john

7/14/2011 1:05:00 PM

0



On Jul 14, 2:21 am, topaz <topazgal...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I agree with much of what you have said. I am still waiting for
> Obama's plan (from his campaign) to stop sending jobs overseas.
> Another campaign promise unfulfilled.
>
> Well he kept one promise...to destroy our health care system as we
> know it. He should have concentrated on creating jobs first.

Was that when he was learning Kenyan socialism in his African
birthplace, or when he was planning terrorist sympathies with Bill
Ayers? What color is the sky in your world? ;-)

I disagree with pretty much everything you wrote, most of which is
factually incorrect.

When two wingnuts compare notes, I feel like I'm listening to two
Scientologists discuss the Thetans that Xenu put into the Earth's
core...

One of the sad things about the Health Care Reform bill is that many
of the benefits do not kick in until 2014.

But Topaz, you must have felt so much freer when the insurance
companies could dump kids from coverage when they got sick, when they
could refuse you for "pre-existing conditions" (i.e. life), when
insurance companies could tell you you had met their "lifetime limit"
on coverage, when seniors could get screwed annually by the "donut
hole" of pharmaceutical coverage, (while Big Pharma kept banking
zillions without competitive pricing, free market be damned).

In fact, this terrible health care gulag we have her in MA is so
dreadful that only "86% of those surveyed said they were pleased with
the range of services covered and the quality of care available, while
82 percent had similar feelings about the choice of doctors."
according to the most recent survey.

I wish we had the freedom to starve in the dark, like the Republicans
want us to. (irony alert).

And as far as job creation, how many job creating bills have the GOP
introduced since taking the House? It seems like nearly every
economist said the stimulus worked, but was far too small in scope, in
order to appease the GOP.

I notice there have been many bills restricting abortion rights and
trying to bring back the incandescent light bulb, so they do have
priorities.