Getting a functionning unstable image

> So I picked the unstable link from the web site
> (http://www.pharo-project.org/pharo-download/unstable-core)
> This drives me to a 13091 image.
> The first thing I do is select the 'update system' menu...
> Err, it fails... It seems related to broken sources...
> Well the image points to which source file ? can't remember the
> incantation, let just browse it...
> Err, no source, I can't browse.
> No matter, I set the browser to decompile mode...
> Err, this does not work, I still can't browse code.
> Hmm very bad starting experience, I know what unstable means, but I
> was dreaming of other words like continuous development.
>

> Hi guys,
> Updating Pharo from the update stream failed many times and keep on
> failing for me...
> But maybe it's just me...
>
> So I picked the unstable link from the web site
> (http://www.pharo-project.org/pharo-download/unstable-core)
> This drives me to a 13091 image.
> The first thing I do is select the 'update system' menu...
> Err, it fails... It seems related to broken sources...
> Well the image points to which source file ? can't remember the
> incantation, let just browse it...
> Err, no source, I can't browse.
> No matter, I set the browser to decompile mode...
> Err, this does not work, I still can't browse code.
> Hmm very bad starting experience, I know what unstable means, but I
> was dreaming of other words like continuous development.
>
> So ket's open an older image (my own updated 1.2) to find the incantations.
> (Scanner>>#scanTokens:) fileIndex -> 1, so it seems that the source
> file is corrupted.
> (SourceFiles at: 1) -> MultiByteFileStream:
> '/Users/nicolas/Smalltalk/Squeak/pharo/PharoV10.sources'
>
> Well, for my previous Pharo images, this very file works !
> How damned can be the file be changed and the version not incremented ?
>
> Is it me who did something wrong ?
> Or the update process somewhere did condense the sources ?
> Or did someone elese messed with the sources ?
> Is it a known problem ?
>
> Any help appreciated.
>
> Nicolas
>

> Hi nicolas
>
> this is strange because I always update all the updates from the latest unstable published by marcus
> (so yes it can be long) and I never get this error. May be you have a broken sources files or something like that.
> I update often multiple times especially when I integrate changes to make sure that I do not a strange changes around.
> and I never get such error.
> What is your OS?
>
> Stef
>
> On Mar 21, 2011, at 9:53 PM, Nicolas Cellier wrote:
>
>> Hi guys,
>> Updating Pharo from the update stream failed many times and keep on
>> failing for me...
>> But maybe it's just me...
>>
>> So I picked the unstable link from the web site
>> (http://www.pharo-project.org/pharo-download/unstable-core)
>> This drives me to a 13091 image.
>> The first thing I do is select the 'update system' menu...
>> Err, it fails... It seems related to broken sources...
>> Well the image points to which source file ? can't remember the
>> incantation, let just browse it...
>> Err, no source, I can't browse.
>> No matter, I set the browser to decompile mode...
>> Err, this does not work, I still can't browse code.
>> Hmm very bad starting experience, I know what unstable means, but I
>> was dreaming of other words like continuous development.
>>
>> So ket's open an older image (my own updated 1.2) to find the incantations.
>> (Scanner>>#scanTokens:) fileIndex -> 1, so it seems that the source
>> file is corrupted.
>> (SourceFiles at: 1) -> MultiByteFileStream:
>> '/Users/nicolas/Smalltalk/Squeak/pharo/PharoV10.sources'
>>
>> Well, for my previous Pharo images, this very file works !
>> How damned can be the file be changed and the version not incremented ?
>>
>> Is it me who did something wrong ?
>> Or the update process somewhere did condense the sources ?
>> Or did someone elese messed with the sources ?
>> Is it a known problem ?
>>
>> Any help appreciated.
>>
>> Nicolas
>>
>
>
>

> I'm inquiring and it seems related to bad handling of author/timestamps.
> Here:
>
> (CompiledMethod allInstances select: [:e | e fileIndex = 1])
> detectMax: [:e | e filePosition]
> (ZipWriteStream class>>#regressionTestFrom: "a
> CompiledMethod(353370112)") filePosition 16234210
>
> (SourceFiles at: 1) size 16249263
>
> So, the highest position still in the source file.
> Let's see the lowest:
>
> (CompiledMethod allInstances select: [:e | e fileIndex = 1])
> detectMin: [:e | e filePosition]
> (AColorSelectorMorph>>#color: "a CompiledMethod(894697472)") filePosition 468
>
> Now, let us see what is in the source file:
>
> (SourceFiles at: 1) position: 0; next: 468
>  '''From Pharo1.0beta of ''''18 October 2009'''' [Latest update:
> #10487] on 19 October 2009 at 6:18:53 pm''!
> BracketSliderMorph subclass: #AColorSelectorMorph
>        instanceVariableNames: ''''
>        classVariableNames: ''''
>        poolDictionaries: ''''
>        category: ''Polymorph-Widgets''!
> !AColorSelectorMorph commentStamp: ''gvc 5/18/2007 13:52'' prior: 0!
> ColorComponentSelector showing an alpha gradient over a hatched background.!
>
>
> !AColorSelectorMorph methodsFor: ''accessing'' stamp: ''gvc 9/3/2009 '
>
> (SourceFiles at: 1) next: 100.
> '13:43''!
> color: aColor
>        "Set the gradient colors."
>
>        super color: aColor asNontranslucentColor.
>        sel'
>
> Yeah, that's what I get in the browser 13:43, it's not the source,
> it's the time...`
>
> In 1.2:
> (AColorSelectorMorph>>#color: ) filePosition 476
>
> (ZipWriteStream class>>#regressionTestFrom: ) filePosition 16248101
>
> So, someone broke my pointers, or someone have a different sources.
>
> Nicolas
>
> 2011/3/21 Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]>:
>> Hi nicolas
>>
>> this is strange because I always update all the updates from the latest unstable published by marcus
>> (so yes it can be long) and I never get this error. May be you have a broken sources files or something like that.
>> I update often multiple times especially when I integrate changes to make sure that I do not a strange changes around.
>> and I never get such error.
>> What is your OS?
>>
>> Stef
>>
>> On Mar 21, 2011, at 9:53 PM, Nicolas Cellier wrote:
>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>> Updating Pharo from the update stream failed many times and keep on
>>> failing for me...
>>> But maybe it's just me...
>>>
>>> So I picked the unstable link from the web site
>>> (http://www.pharo-project.org/pharo-download/unstable-core)
>>> This drives me to a 13091 image.
>>> The first thing I do is select the 'update system' menu...
>>> Err, it fails... It seems related to broken sources...
>>> Well the image points to which source file ? can't remember the
>>> incantation, let just browse it...
>>> Err, no source, I can't browse.
>>> No matter, I set the browser to decompile mode...
>>> Err, this does not work, I still can't browse code.
>>> Hmm very bad starting experience, I know what unstable means, but I
>>> was dreaming of other words like continuous development.
>>>
>>> So ket's open an older image (my own updated 1.2) to find the incantations.
>>> (Scanner>>#scanTokens:) fileIndex -> 1, so it seems that the source
>>> file is corrupted.
>>> (SourceFiles at: 1) -> MultiByteFileStream:
>>> '/Users/nicolas/Smalltalk/Squeak/pharo/PharoV10.sources'
>>>
>>> Well, for my previous Pharo images, this very file works !
>>> How damned can be the file be changed and the version not incremented ?
>>>
>>> Is it me who did something wrong ?
>>> Or the update process somewhere did condense the sources ?
>>> Or did someone elese messed with the sources ?
>>> Is it a known problem ?
>>>
>>> Any help appreciated.
>>>
>>> Nicolas
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>

> I'm inquiring and it seems related to bad handling of author/timestamps.
> Here:
>
> (CompiledMethod allInstances select: [:e | e fileIndex = 1])
> detectMax: [:e | e filePosition]
> (ZipWriteStream class>>#regressionTestFrom: "a
> CompiledMethod(353370112)") filePosition 16234210
>
> (SourceFiles at: 1) size 16249263
>
> So, the highest position still in the source file.
> Let's see the lowest:
>
> (CompiledMethod allInstances select: [:e | e fileIndex = 1])
> detectMin: [:e | e filePosition]
> (AColorSelectorMorph>>#color: "a CompiledMethod(894697472)") filePosition 468
>
> Now, let us see what is in the source file:
>
> (SourceFiles at: 1) position: 0; next: 468
> '''From Pharo1.0beta of ''''18 October 2009'''' [Latest update:
> #10487] on 19 October 2009 at 6:18:53 pm''!
> BracketSliderMorph subclass: #AColorSelectorMorph
> instanceVariableNames: ''''
> classVariableNames: ''''
> poolDictionaries: ''''
> category: ''Polymorph-Widgets''!
> !AColorSelectorMorph commentStamp: ''gvc 5/18/2007 13:52'' prior: 0!
> ColorComponentSelector showing an alpha gradient over a hatched background.!
>
>
> !AColorSelectorMorph methodsFor: ''accessing'' stamp: ''gvc 9/3/2009 '
>
> (SourceFiles at: 1) next: 100.
> '13:43''!
> color: aColor
> "Set the gradient colors."
>
> super color: aColor asNontranslucentColor.
> sel'
>
> Yeah, that's what I get in the browser 13:43, it's not the source,
> it's the time...`
>
> In 1.2:
> (AColorSelectorMorph>>#color: ) filePosition 476
>
> (ZipWriteStream class>>#regressionTestFrom: ) filePosition 16248101
>
> So, someone broke my pointers, or someone have a different sources.
>
> Nicolas
>
> 2011/3/21 Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]>:
>> Hi nicolas
>>
>> this is strange because I always update all the updates from the latest unstable published by marcus
>> (so yes it can be long) and I never get this error. May be you have a broken sources files or something like that.
>> I update often multiple times especially when I integrate changes to make sure that I do not a strange changes around.
>> and I never get such error.
>> What is your OS?
>>
>> Stef
>>
>> On Mar 21, 2011, at 9:53 PM, Nicolas Cellier wrote:
>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>> Updating Pharo from the update stream failed many times and keep on
>>> failing for me...
>>> But maybe it's just me...
>>>
>>> So I picked the unstable link from the web site
>>> (http://www.pharo-project.org/pharo-download/unstable-core)
>>> This drives me to a 13091 image.
>>> The first thing I do is select the 'update system' menu...
>>> Err, it fails... It seems related to broken sources...
>>> Well the image points to which source file ? can't remember the
>>> incantation, let just browse it...
>>> Err, no source, I can't browse.
>>> No matter, I set the browser to decompile mode...
>>> Err, this does not work, I still can't browse code.
>>> Hmm very bad starting experience, I know what unstable means, but I
>>> was dreaming of other words like continuous development.
>>>
>>> So ket's open an older image (my own updated 1.2) to find the incantations.
>>> (Scanner>>#scanTokens:) fileIndex -> 1, so it seems that the source
>>> file is corrupted.
>>> (SourceFiles at: 1) -> MultiByteFileStream:
>>> '/Users/nicolas/Smalltalk/Squeak/pharo/PharoV10.sources'
>>>
>>> Well, for my previous Pharo images, this very file works !
>>> How damned can be the file be changed and the version not incremented ?
>>>
>>> Is it me who did something wrong ?
>>> Or the update process somewhere did condense the sources ?
>>> Or did someone elese messed with the sources ?
>>> Is it a known problem ?
>>>
>>> Any help appreciated.
>>>
>>> Nicolas
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>

>> So it was my fault finally: it's because I was too early, and started
>> from Pharo0.x, then applied this automated condenseSources:
>>
> Oh.
>>
>> That explains why I can never upgrade from a newer image...
>> I brought my 0.x image up to 1.2 by some tricky manual MC loading
>> and/or selective loading.
>> But now, things shall be easier :)
>>
>
> Yes... the thing is that everythign that we do not test will not work. We
> do not test updating 0.x --> 1.2. It *will* be broken.
> (And there is the question if it makes sense to keep these things working.
> I vote for investing into a declarative bootstrap instead, far more important)
>
> Marcus
>
>
> --
> Marcus Denker  -- http://www.marcusdenker.de
> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD.
>
>

>>> So it was my fault finally: it's because I was too early, and started
>>> from Pharo0.x, then applied this automated condenseSources:
>>>
>> Oh.
>>>
>>> That explains why I can never upgrade from a newer image...
>>> I brought my 0.x image up to 1.2 by some tricky manual MC loading
>>> and/or selective loading.
>>> But now, things shall be easier :)
>>>
>>
>> Yes... the thing is that everythign that we do not test will not work. We
>> do not test updating 0.x --> 1.2. It *will* be broken.
>> (And there is the question if it makes sense to keep these things working.
>> I vote for investing into a declarative bootstrap instead, far more important)
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>> --
>> Marcus Denker  -- http://www.marcusdenker.de
>> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD.
>>
>>
>
>

>
> On Mar 22, 2011, at 1:25 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> Now condenses change should work too :)
>>
>
> I am slowly adopting a radical "if we don't test it, it's will brake" point of view.
> I now even say: If we don't test it, it *should* be broken! Because it is dead
> code and should be removed.
>

> On 22 March 2011 13:28, Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 22, 2011, at 1:25 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Now condenses change should work too :)
>>>
>>
>> I am slowly adopting a radical "if we don't test it, it's will brake" point of view.
>> I now even say: If we don't test it, it *should* be broken! Because it is dead
>> code and should be removed.
>>
>
> I like a systematic approach. :)
>

>>        Marcus
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
>
>

> 2011/3/22 Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]>:
>> On 22 March 2011 13:28, Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mar 22, 2011, at 1:25 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> Now condenses change should work too :)
>>>>
>>>
>>> I am slowly adopting a radical "if we don't test it, it's will brake" point of view.
>>> I now even say: If we don't test it, it *should* be broken! Because it is dead
>>> code and should be removed.
>>>
>>
>> I like a systematic approach. :)
>>
>
> Agree,
> If not maintained it won't work.
> If not tested it's not maintained.
> So your sentence must be true in most cases (except case of luck)
>
> And if not maintained, the choices are
> - revive
> - or remove
> and that is the Pharo way, Squeak being more conservative.
>