This question already has answers here:
Portable Ruby on Rails environment
(6 answers)
Closed 7 years ago.
Is there any way to run a RoR app as a 'portbale app'?
For instance, can you put an app including the ruby on rails stack, web server et all, on a stick and then just run it on a windows machine? Without installing?
There was project called Instant Rails that provided this more or less, but it's not maintained. (http://rubyforge.org/projects/instantrails/)
Also, there is RubyStack from Bitnami (http://bitnami.org/stack/rubystack#nativeInstaller) but it needs to be installed (I can go with that, but rather not).
So, the question is, can Ruby on Rails, including a specific app, be made to run on any computer (well, let's start with Win) from a stick, CD or DVD, without having to install anything first?
I think this is what you are looking for:
http://www.erikveen.dds.nl/distributingrubyapplications/rails.html
This tutorial walks you thru the entire process of creating a self-containing windows app that bundles your rails application inside it.
Related
Just a quick question from a Rails learner.
As I understand it, it is not necessary to place a new Rails app inside the directory where Ruby and Rails are installed.
But, is there an ideal place for apps? What are experienced developers using?
I ask this, because I may have misplaced a previous app, hidden somewhere deep in a directory structure; and, strange as it might seem to most of you, I cannot find where the older app is.
I have quite some problems searching in Windows 10; it is a nightmare, compared to how it was in Windows XP.
There isn't "standard", community agreed directory structure for Rails apps.
However, I noticed that many developers would create Projects folder within their "user home" directory (C:\Users\username in Windows and ~ in linux distro). I do the same and when I need to find some project I worked on 5 years ago, I don't think twice where to look for it. Obviously, that means you'd end up with a lot of project dirs in your Projects folder. So I move very old projects to my backup disk occasionally.
A quick note on Ruby/Rails. Rails projects are not like PHP. They are more like Java, when you run your application (as a separate process) and it stays in the memory running & serving user requests. In PHP you had to put your php files into your server's document directory so that server could parse and execute your scripts. So, with Rails projects you are not limited with where you put them.
Some background:
I am new to Ruby and Rails and I've been assigned to get an already completed Ruby on Rails project to compile from source.
The project has, as far as I've been able to discover, little to no documentation on how to set it up. The developers are unavailable for me to contact.
After doing some tutorials and learning the basics I have been trying to get the code to compile and run. My platform/setup is currently:
Windows 7
Ruby 1.9.3
Rails 3.2.13
Although I am attempting to develop with a VirtualBox Ubuntu setup alongside of this because I suspect it will be easier in the long run.
Despite there being no Gemfile for this project I have managed to (I believe) pin down and install all of the necessary gem packages (hopefully compatible versions). I am now running into this issue:
in alias_method': undefined methodpath' for class `ActionController::UploadedStringIO' (NameError)
As far as my searches have led me to believe this is a bug that can occur when the versions of Ruby and Rails are not correct/incompatible?
Is there a way to "reverse engineer" what version of Ruby and Rails was used to develop this project in the first place from the code alone? Could this bug be caused by me using 3.2.13 Rails if the original developers were using 1.8.7 Ruby? It seems to me that if I can emulate their setup closely enough then the source should compile and I can get down to business.
Additionally I am using the default WEBrick server. Is there a way to determine what the original team used for the web service? Does it even matter if they used a Apache setup or are these server implementations mostly interchangeable aside from efficiency?
Thank you for your time. If you have any further advice on how to handle this sort of project I'd love to hear that too.
If there is no Gemfile, it points to the Rails app being 2.3 or earlier. As for the Web server, they are interchangeable, but there is really very little chance that they were using Webrick, due to its ability (or lack thereof) to handle many concurrent requests. Chances are, they were using mongrel, or passenger via Apache or Nginx.
I just start RoR development for two weeks, It's pretty amazing programming language so far. It's impressing me so much so that I'm start to thinking about change the programming language of my client's project from PHP to RoR. But what I want to know is, is it possible to make a RoR web app looks like a Native App when using it in a local machine. By the term of Native app I mean ..
The user doesn't have to run script/server or rails server every time they starts their machine
Either access it by Web Browser or something else is fine.
Can be running with Window 7 or Window XP
Other recommendation are welcome. (Including, the reason not to use RoR to develop a local application)
I personally don't think there's anything ridiculous with wanting to deploy a Rails app as a desktop application but it's certainly not the easiest thing to do. Heres a list of what you're going to need:
a compiled distributable ruby interpreter
a distributable database
a script to bootstrap the whole thing( preferably that runs on the click of an icon or when system starts)
an installer
optionally:
write a simple shell in qt or java(possibly with the ruby bindings even) that handled starting and stopping the rails app, and provided a webframe for your customer to use instead of the standard web browser.
Here's a tutorial on deploying a rails app as a desktop app, though for debian, that should start you in the right direction. But your best bet for a quick gui application in ruby is shoes.
since rails is framework for web development there is no way to avoid starting rails server to show something on local machine. you might hide the fact that server is being started by running it as service without letting the user know about it but that's only as far as you can get.
so yes, it is possible to bundle your application into a "native app" but i'm afraid it will be extremely fragile as there are too many pieces that need to fit together: ruby itself, database to use, rails and all the other gems. big chance is you will have a gem that needs to be compiled and then you're in trouble.
bottom line: it's not worth it, either host your app or pick a better solution to develop something that runs only locally.
Maybe out of topic, but if you want to make native application, perhaps make native application? I mean, what's the purpose to develop a web application and then host it locally?
At least, you could consider using free hosts, such as heroku. http://your-project-name.heroku.com will grant you a 5mb database and 1 worker. It's free, will save you a lot of troubles and will make it easier for you to deploy newer version to your clients.
Just have them put a bookmark on their desktop if they want to double click to open application.
Maybe I am wrong but you seem to miss the fact that RoR is not a programming language. Ruby is a programming language and RoR is web-development framework. Anyway if you want to develop desktop applications, you can use Ruby with a framework such as Bowline (to keep the MVC spirit).
If you want a Web application, build a Web application. If you want to build a desktop application, try Monkeybars or Appcelerator.
Quite late for my answer but anyway I had the same problem and use the gem ocra to build an exe for windows.
It is also possible to generate a setup to install the program in the register.
It is still necessary to have a server started but the user has just to click on the exe program; A console is opened and give some instructions like 'after the start of the server, open a browser and go to localhost:3000; Ctrl + C to exit when you have finished.
It could be possible to have the server launched as a service but I think my users prefer to know if the program is running or not.
ocra is not really easy to set but eventually it works fine.
I was following the solution on this answer for distributing rails apps but it seems like it's not up to date for everything with slingshot.
I just can't get it working. Is there a new or another way to get a rails application distributed into offline exe file and .app for Mac OS X ?
I went down this path a year or two ago and didn't find any success. I couldn't ever get Slingshot to work with 2.3.x Rails apps, I even thought about deploying the application on an entire OS system wrapped up into a virtual .exe using Xenocode (which is now Spoon Studio). Ultimately, I rebuilt the back-end Ruby stuff in javascript and deployed it as an AIR app, not something I'd recommend or even do again myself.
There's another thread on this topic with some other options listed in the answers and comments:
Distributing Rails Applications as Native Applications
Good luck.
I have a old app made on rails 1.2.5, this application have alot of access per day.
I intend to upgrade my server (a joyent accelerator) to run ruby 1.9.x and work with rails 3 but I can't stop or move this app to another server.
Have any way to run this application on ruby 1.9?
or run two ruby versions (1.8.7 and 1.9) at the same time?
or on the last case upgrade my app to work with rails 3?
Thanks.
There was quite a few patches to Rails to make it run under Ruby 1.9. I think you are up for a challenge if you try to do that. With Ruby Version Manager you can work with multiple ruby environments from interpreters to sets of gems.
Does it have to be switched over to Rails3 and Ruby 1.9?
Can you just throw you old app on a virtualized server and keep the app running as is?
The reason for my suggestion is that we just went through a similar case. A local business (a construction association) had a pair of apps developed for them 2-3 years ago (works with Rails 1.2.6). Nothing overly major (a billing app, and a bid/contractor/customer management system). Everything works, so no need to update anything.
Their hosting provider was not willing to keep an old outdated rails available in shared hosting environment. Hosting shop cited maintenance can't be streamlined, security concerns, etc. Sure enough, the same host offers to rewrite the apps for current technologies (for a price, of course).
Client wasn't happy with them. The shop that developed the apps since closed and the developers left for greener pastures. But everything works, so why reinvent the wheel, right? Client went looking for alternatives. Came to us. We sat down with the client, did some cost/benefit analysis and decided to just host in a virtualized environment (at another provider). Did that in a week (with some hick-ups): back-up, move, restore, test, everything works. And it's been working now for 3 months without any issues.
This might not work for you, but unless you need to add to the app why fix what ain't broken?
Rails 3 works with Ruby 1.8.7
Another option (apart from obvious RVM) is to leave your Ruby 1.8.7 and Rails 1.x as is and install latest JRuby and Rails 3.0 and dependent gems with jruby -S gem install rails. Ruby and JRuby gems perfectly coexist without any interference. OpenSolaris in Joyent's Accelerator is good at running Java, so you won't have much problems with it.
P.S. Btw, I won't recommend updating your Rails 1.x app to 3.x, unless you're planning to add lots of new features to it. It can be very painful, especially if you used lots of old-school gems and plugins.