That's what I mean. Windows, the same, with a UNIX core, instead of DOS.
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 2:26 AM, Hugh Sasse <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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
>>
--
~devyn
