On Fri, 29 May 2009, Devyn Cairns wrote: > Except it flunked. I'm talking about Windows but with a UNIX core instead.
I don't think being one of the most widely used flavours of Unix constitutes flunking. I don't know why SCO acquired exclusive rights to it, and can't remember why SCO was out-evolved in its turn. The details don't matter that much; Microsoft have tried Unix and for whatever reason rejected it. Unix is not without its flaws: http://www.faqs.org/docs/artu/ch20s03.html I do prefer it to many aspects of Windows, but Shoes (in so far as it is the basis of Hackety Hack, at least) is evolving a culture of supporting the beginner. That hasn't exactly been a core value of Unix, or internet programmer culture. You will, I'm sure, have seen complaints about lack of documentation for Ruby, if not other software out there. This is something Windows has partially right. It supports the absolute beginner. (However, it treats one as though one is incapable of progressing beyond that state.) So problems on windows should, in my opinion, not be "solved" by switching to something else, not least because they will only crop up with someone else later. Hugh > > On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 11:34 AM, Hugh Sasse <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, 29 May 2009, Devyn Cairns wrote: > > > >> Your welcome! > >> > >> Wow... UNIX has superior awesomeness. Apple has already jumped > >> onboard. Microsoft just needs to make a UNIX-based operating system > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenix > > > > Used this on an Intel 86/310 system driving a cellular logic image processor > > (CLIP4). > > > >> now instead of trying to be different and screwing things up. > >> > >> Anyway, I'm glad I could help. But the packager should work on Windows, > >> so... > > > > It would be worth exploring the Windows options for that reason exactly. > > > > Hugh > >> > >> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Roger Ostrander <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > Interestingly enough, 'Switch to Linux' was the solution. As far as > >> > packaging, goes, that is. Running the shoes packager in a VMed Ubuntu > >> > resulted in a nice pristine .exe which works fine under XP SP2. > >> > Thanks for the advice, all :) > >> > > >> > On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 6:36 PM, Devyn Cairns <[email protected]> > >> > wrote: > >> >> Honestly, I would just say "Switch to Linux" but I know that sometimes > >> >> that isn't an option. > >> >> > >> >> It doesn't really seem like a Shoes hiccup though... what happens if > >> >> you package it on Windows XP SP2? > >> >> > >> >> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 8:23 PM, Roger Ostrander <[email protected]> > >> >> wrote: > >> >>> Hello, > >> >>> > >> >>> I created my program on Windows XP, SP3. I used the packager to > >> >>> make it into a .exe and didn't have any problems during the process. > >> >>> However, when I transfer that .exe over to my Virtual Machine and try > >> >>> to run it, I get: > >> >>> > >> >>> Error in C:/Program Files/Common Files/Shoes/0.r1134/lib/shoes/shy.rb > >> >>> line 62 > >> >>> ! invalid distance too far back > >> >>> > >> >>> So I tried testing it on my computer, only to discover that the .exe > >> >>> doesn't even work there! > >> >>> > >> >>> Error in C:/Program Files/Common > >> >>> Files/Shoes/0.r1134/lib/shoes/minitar.rb line 661 > >> >>> ! Permission denied - > >> >>> C:/DOCUME~1/Roger/LOCALS~1/Temp/shoes-llm.4208/./ > >> >>> > >> >>> Any help for either of these? I really like using Shoes as a > >> >>> development platform, please don't make me go back to Java :) > >> >>> > >> >>> -- > >> >>> Roger > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> ~devyn > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Roger > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> ~devyn > >> > > > > -- > ~devyn >
