10.2.8 saga continued

Discussion in 'Ruby' started by Julian Leviston, Aug 12, 2005.

  1. Hey guys,

    I just realised when I was "make"-ing the ruby 1.8.2, it kept saying
    "nothing to be done for All"... is that normal? Can anyone tell me if
    this is the normal results for a make?

    gcc -g -O2 -pipe -fno-common main.o dmyext.o libruby-static.a -
    ldl -lobjc -o miniruby
    compiling bigdecimal
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling curses
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling dbm
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling digest
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling digest/md5
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling digest/rmd160
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling digest/sha1
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling digest/sha2
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling dl
    compiling enumerator
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling etc
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling fcntl
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling gdbm
    compiling iconv
    compiling io/wait
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling nkf
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling openssl
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling pty
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling racc/cparse
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling readline
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling sdbm
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling socket
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling stringio
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling strscan
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling syck
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling syslog
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling tcltklib
    compiling tk
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    compiling Win32API
    compiling win32ole
    compiling zlib
    make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    making ruby
    gcc -g -O2 -pipe -fno-common -L. main.o -lruby-static -ldl -
    lobjc -o ruby
    Julian Leviston, Aug 12, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Julian Leviston

    Ralf Müller Guest

    On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 20:24:45 +0900
    Julian Leviston <> wrote:

    > Hey guys,
    >
    > I just realised when I was "make"-ing the ruby 1.8.2, it kept saying
    > "nothing to be done for All"... is that normal? Can anyone tell me if
    > this is the normal results for a make?
    >
    > gcc -g -O2 -pipe -fno-common main.o dmyext.o libruby-static.a -
    > ldl -lobjc -o miniruby
    > compiling bigdecimal
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling curses
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling dbm
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling digest
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling digest/md5
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling digest/rmd160
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling digest/sha1
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling digest/sha2
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling dl
    > compiling enumerator
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling etc
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling fcntl
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling gdbm
    > compiling iconv
    > compiling io/wait
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling nkf
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling openssl
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling pty
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling racc/cparse
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling readline
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling sdbm
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling socket
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling stringio
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling strscan
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling syck
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling syslog
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > compiling tcltklib
    > compiling tk
    > make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.


    For compiling these ext-libs look at your ext/Setup file in the source
    directory. You should remove the '#' sign for compiling.

    best regards
    ralf
    Ralf Müller, Aug 12, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Should they all be on?


    On 12/08/2005, at 10:33 PM, Ralf M=FCller wrote:

    > On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 20:24:45 +0900
    > Julian Leviston <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >> Hey guys,
    >>
    >> I just realised when I was "make"-ing the ruby 1.8.2, it kept saying
    >> "nothing to be done for All"... is that normal? Can anyone tell me if
    >> this is the normal results for a make?
    >>
    >> gcc -g -O2 -pipe -fno-common main.o dmyext.o libruby-static.a -
    >> ldl -lobjc -o miniruby
    >> compiling bigdecimal
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling curses
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling dbm
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling digest
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling digest/md5
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling digest/rmd160
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling digest/sha1
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling digest/sha2
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling dl
    >> compiling enumerator
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling etc
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling fcntl
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling gdbm
    >> compiling iconv
    >> compiling io/wait
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling nkf
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling openssl
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling pty
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling racc/cparse
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling readline
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling sdbm
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling socket
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling stringio
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling strscan
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling syck
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling syslog
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >> compiling tcltklib
    >> compiling tk
    >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>

    >
    > For compiling these ext-libs look at your ext/Setup file in the source
    > directory. You should remove the '#' sign for compiling.
    >
    > best regards
    > ralf
    >
    >
    Julian Leviston, Aug 12, 2005
    #3
  4. Julian Leviston

    Ralf Müller Guest

    On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 21:55:03 +0900
    Julian Leviston <> wrote:

    > Should they all be on?
    >


    this depends on what you want to do with ruby?

    if unsure take them all. This will increase your interpreter from 1.3 MB to 2.5
    MB. I'm sure many gems rely on some of these external libs. So it will you
    keep painfree (hopefully) when installing additional ruby software.
    Ralf Müller, Aug 12, 2005
    #4
  5. On 8/12/05, Julian Leviston <> wrote:
    > Should they all be on?
    >=20
    >=20


    the ./configure script should turn on the ones appropriate for your
    machine, depending on what headers it can find.

    Since you're on 10.2.x, let me ask - Have you installed the BSD
    subsystem? I don't remember if installing the Dev Tools will
    automatically install that or not, and I remember it was not installed
    by default.

    It seems like during ./configure, none of the headers necessary for
    building the Ruby extensions were found.

    Untar a clean ruby tree again, run ./configure, and check the output.

    Jason


    > On 12/08/2005, at 10:33 PM, Ralf M=FCller wrote:
    >=20
    > > On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 20:24:45 +0900
    > > Julian Leviston <> wrote:
    > >
    > >
    > >> Hey guys,
    > >>
    > >> I just realised when I was "make"-ing the ruby 1.8.2, it kept saying
    > >> "nothing to be done for All"... is that normal? Can anyone tell me if
    > >> this is the normal results for a make?
    > >>
    > >> gcc -g -O2 -pipe -fno-common main.o dmyext.o libruby-static.a -
    > >> ldl -lobjc -o miniruby
    > >> compiling bigdecimal
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling curses
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling dbm
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling digest
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling digest/md5
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling digest/rmd160
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling digest/sha1
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling digest/sha2
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling dl
    > >> compiling enumerator
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling etc
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling fcntl
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling gdbm
    > >> compiling iconv
    > >> compiling io/wait
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling nkf
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling openssl
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling pty
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling racc/cparse
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling readline
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling sdbm
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling socket
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling stringio
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling strscan
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling syck
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling syslog
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >> compiling tcltklib
    > >> compiling tk
    > >> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    > >>

    > >
    > > For compiling these ext-libs look at your ext/Setup file in the source
    > > directory. You should remove the '#' sign for compiling.
    > >
    > > best regards
    > > ralf
    > >
    > >

    >=20
    >=20
    >
    Jason Foreman, Aug 12, 2005
    #5
  6. I want to run rubygems.

    I want to run Rails.


    On 12/08/2005, at 11:11 PM, Ralf M=FCller wrote:

    > On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 21:55:03 +0900
    > Julian Leviston <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >> Should they all be on?
    >>
    >>

    >
    > this depends on what you want to do with ruby?
    >
    > if unsure take them all. This will increase your interpreter from =20
    > 1.3 MB to 2.5
    > MB. I'm sure many gems rely on some of these external libs. So it =20=


    > will you
    > keep painfree (hopefully) when installing additional ruby software.
    >
    >
    Julian Leviston, Aug 12, 2005
    #6
  7. That is about the most help ANYONE has been in ages. Thanks! This is =20
    about the 10th time I've untarred a clean one, though...

    Julian.

    On 12/08/2005, at 11:11 PM, Jason Foreman wrote:

    > On 8/12/05, Julian Leviston <> wrote:
    >
    >> Should they all be on?
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    > the ./configure script should turn on the ones appropriate for your
    > machine, depending on what headers it can find.
    >
    > Since you're on 10.2.x, let me ask - Have you installed the BSD
    > subsystem? I don't remember if installing the Dev Tools will
    > automatically install that or not, and I remember it was not installed
    > by default.
    >
    > It seems like during ./configure, none of the headers necessary for
    > building the Ruby extensions were found.
    >
    > Untar a clean ruby tree again, run ./configure, and check the output.
    >
    > Jason
    >
    >
    >
    >> On 12/08/2005, at 10:33 PM, Ralf M=FCller wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 20:24:45 +0900
    >>> Julian Leviston <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> Hey guys,
    >>>>
    >>>> I just realised when I was "make"-ing the ruby 1.8.2, it kept =20
    >>>> saying
    >>>> "nothing to be done for All"... is that normal? Can anyone tell =20
    >>>> me if
    >>>> this is the normal results for a make?
    >>>>
    >>>> gcc -g -O2 -pipe -fno-common main.o dmyext.o libruby-static.a -
    >>>> ldl -lobjc -o miniruby
    >>>> compiling bigdecimal
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling curses
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling dbm
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling digest
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling digest/md5
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling digest/rmd160
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling digest/sha1
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling digest/sha2
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling dl
    >>>> compiling enumerator
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling etc
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling fcntl
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling gdbm
    >>>> compiling iconv
    >>>> compiling io/wait
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling nkf
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling openssl
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling pty
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling racc/cparse
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling readline
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling sdbm
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling socket
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling stringio
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling strscan
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling syck
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling syslog
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>> compiling tcltklib
    >>>> compiling tk
    >>>> make[1]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> For compiling these ext-libs look at your ext/Setup file in the =20
    >>> source
    >>> directory. You should remove the '#' sign for compiling.
    >>>
    >>> best regards
    >>> ralf
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    Julian Leviston, Aug 12, 2005
    #7
  8. Julian Leviston wrote:
    > That is about the most help ANYONE has been in ages. Thanks! This is
    > about the 10th time I've untarred a clean one, though...


    I don't know anything about MacOS, but I've seen cases where configure
    was badly fooled by a problem running gcc or some lower-level script.
    Configure sometimes concludes that a header or library is not present
    because an attempt to locate it fails. This conclusion can be wrong if
    the reason for the failure is something other than absence of the header
    or library. Look at config.log and see if there's some repeated failure.

    Steve
    Steven Jenkins, Aug 12, 2005
    #8
  9. Julian Leviston

    Ralf Müller Guest

    On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 22:21:13 +0900
    Julian Leviston <> wrote:

    > I want to run rubygems.
    >
    > I want to run Rails.
    >


    Maybe you've already done this, but:

    rubygems:
    try "ruby setup.rb" inside the rubygems directory. try "which ruby" order "type
    ruby" (bash specific). The output should be the ruby, you've hopefully installed
    with the ext-libs.

    rails:
    "gem install rails"

    you should perform all these actions under the same user, you've installed ruby
    with.

    hth

    best regards
    ralf
    Ralf Müller, Aug 15, 2005
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Lloyd Dupont
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    362
    Lloyd Dupont
    Sep 30, 2004
  2. Lloyd Dupont
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    428
    Guest
    Dec 22, 2004
  3. Ethan Furman

    the unicode saga continues...

    Ethan Furman, Nov 14, 2009, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    476
    Martin v. Löwis
    Nov 14, 2009
  4. Alex Hall

    py2exe saga continues...

    Alex Hall, Apr 16, 2010, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    241
    alex23
    Apr 16, 2010
  5. sonic
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    134
    sonic
    Oct 9, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page