Patch is attached. This allows rake to run, and more specifically "rake rails:freeze:edge" works (even though edge rails does not appear to work correctly in JRuby right now).Changes:- load 'filename' now only looks for filename in the load path; it does not attempt to append any extensions.
- requ
At 08:22 2006-06-29, you wrote:
>I'm having some issues with the rake shell script. It installs,
>surprisingly, with #!/path/to/jruby_shellscript, but when attempting to
>run it directly, it seems to run with sh alone:
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/testrails/test4$ $JRUBY_HOME/bin/rake rails:freeze:edge
I'm having some issues with the rake shell script. It installs, surprisingly, with #!/path/to/jruby_shellscript, but when attempting to run it directly, it seems to run with sh alone:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/testrails/test4$ $JRUBY_HOME/bin/rake rails:freeze:edge
/home/headius/workspace/jruby/bin/rake:
Tom went ahead and applied this patch last night, so I just gave it a whirl. It definitely appears to be working well.[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/workspace/jruby$ time gem install --version=1.1.2 rails --include-dependencies --no-rdoc
...real 0m47.541suser 0m30.322ssys 0m3.336sOn this same system
I have a patch for this modified behavior in the works. It seems to allow rake to run correctly installed from a gem (where it did not run at all before). There is also an additional difference in behavior I don't think we're enforcing: according to Ruby docs for Kernel#load: "In no circumstance wi
Actually I think I figured it out. The gem install also has a bin dir, which is what gets loaded when you "load 'rake'". This actually kicks off the script.I found the issue in JRuby, but I thought I'd confirm it with you:
The logic behind 'load' and 'require' in JRuby has long been identical, othe
On 6/28/06, Charles O Nutter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Awesome. Now we just need a 1.1.4 release of Rails.
Actually it probably was applied to trunk, whereas I'm betting that
the "stable" branch is the 1.1.x series, so this probably won't be
released until 1.2, but that is supposed to come alon
Awesome. Now we just need a 1.1.4 release of Rails.-- Forwarded message --From: Ruby on Rails <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Date: Jun 28, 2006 3:53 PMSubject: Re: [Ruby on Rails] #4440: Use of block args as assignment should goTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
#4440: Use of block args as assignment shoul
Oops, I think I entirely forgot -u in the last patch. I see you got it to work anyway, so I won't reattach.
If you're having trouble with other patches, I probably forgot to
remove excess garbage from "cvs diff -u" which seems to confuse patch
sometimes.
Apologies,
Evan
On 6/28/06, Charles O Nu
Thanks for the reminder; once we have a real issue tracker we'll be in a lot better shape; for now we just track submissions between the two of us and work things out manually.BTW, I've had some trouble applying your patches. Could you make sure they're valid udiff patchfiles?
On 6/28/06, Evan Busw
Sweet. Yeah, I can wait. I just share Nick's dubiousness of
how on earth all these patches, submissions, and bugs are kept track of
now (especially considering the current rate of development) so I
thought I'd send a friendly reminder.
EvanOn 6/28/06, Charles O Nutter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We have numerous objects that have a getId() method on them. in 0.8.2, foo.id
and foo.getId were not the same (presumably because ruby's Object#id was
already defined). In 0.8.3 they *are* the same. Was this an intentional
change or an accidental one?
David
Using Tomcat but need to do more?
http://jruby.codehaus.org/There's a confluence out there for it, and I think Tom is looking into getting JIRA up. We're mostly focused on the release at the moment, but we're on Codehaus immediately after the release.
On 6/28/06, Nick Sieger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/28/06, Evan Buswell <[EMA
On 6/28/06, Evan Buswell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've noticed my patch for getting Base64 decoding working right hasn't made
> it into cvs. Obviously there's other priorities for 0.9, but I can't go
> back to using the head until Base64 decoding is fixed.
Can we make it a post release priori
I've noticed my patch for getting Base64 decoding working right hasn't
made it into cvs. Obviously there's other priorities for
0.9, but I can't go back to using the head until Base64 decoding is
fixed.
Patch is attached again just in case.
Sorry to be a squeaky wheel ;-)
Evan
> Array#unpack w/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thomas E Enebo wrote:
> I fixed this. It is a one-liner and fairly obvious (if it would have
> been any more difficult I would have held off until 0.9.1).
>
> -Tom
Thanks, that seems to have done the trick. And sourceforge public cvs
updated quick
I fixed this. It is a one-liner and fairly obvious (if it would have
been any more difficult I would have held off until 0.9.1).
-Tom
On Wed, 28 Jun 2006, Damian Steer defenestrated me:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Just tripped over this one. Using current cvs.
>
>
Fixed.
-Tom
On Wed, 28 Jun 2006, Thomas E Enebo defenestrated me:
> Hmmm, yeah someone must be using %W, which is obviously broken.
> The production it is dying because it assumes that the first element
> in word_list is already a valid ListNode, when it starts as null.
> Fix coming up short
Hmmm, yeah someone must be using %W, which is obviously broken.
The production it is dying because it assumes that the first element
in word_list is already a valid ListNode, when it starts as null.
Fix coming up shortly (we actually have this in three places).
-Tom
On Tue, 27 Jun 2006, Nick Si
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Just tripped over this one. Using current cvs.
jruby:
irb(main):001:0> class Fun < Proc
irb(main):002:1> end
=> nil
irb(main):003:0> Fun.new {|a| p a}
=> #
Oops. That should be a Fun, not a Proc.
Damian
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG
20 matches
Mail list logo
