***Important*** Snapcraft pharo package for Pharo 50
Locked
***Important*** Snapcraft pharo package for Pharo 50
 
|
Hi pharoers
I want to share with you my experience with trying to use Pharo at the University here on Linux. I think that they are on Ubuntu and ... the sys admin told me that they cannot install Pharo :( Since I'm not expert in Linux install I cannot help ;( So we will probably use windows. Now they told me that what would be nice is to get a snap for Pharo based on snapcraft.io. Does any of you have a snap description or willing to help so that we can get a snap for Pharo50? then for Pharo60? Stef |
|
|
Looks like interesting tech. I can't help for now since I'm out of
town tomorrow on two week family vacation. (but TGF for smartphone gmail) cheers -ben On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 9:38 PM, Stephane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi pharoers > > I want to share with you my experience with trying to use Pharo at the > University here on Linux. > I think that they are on Ubuntu and ... the sys admin told me that they > cannot install Pharo :( > Since I'm not expert in Linux install I cannot help ;( > > So we will probably use windows. > Now they told me that what would be nice is to get a snap for Pharo > based on snapcraft.io. > > Does any of you have a snap description or willing to help so that we can > get > a snap for Pharo50? then for Pharo60? > > Stef |
Re: ***Important*** Snapcraft pharo package for Pharo 50
|
|
I have some time, I'll check it out this afternoon On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 3:01 PM, Ben Coman <[hidden email]> wrote: Looks like interesting tech. I can't help for now since I'm out of |
|
|
looks same idea of http://openbuildservice.org, I hope this is easier (I never understood how to make OBS work for us… never had the time either :( )
Esteban
|
Re: ***Important*** Snapcraft pharo package for Pharo 50
|
|
In reply to this post by Stephane Ducasse-3
Stef, RE: why they "cannot install Pharo" --- I'd guess it is because Pharo requires 32 bit libraries and those are not available in the current Linux releases by default ... to install the 32 bit libraries requires sudo privileges and students aren't going to be able to do it themselves and the sysadmins aren't going to want to have to add 32 bit libraries to a bunch of linux machines just for pharo ... just a guess . Dale On 01/06/2017 05:38 AM, Stephane
Ducasse wrote:
|
Re: ***Important*** Snapcraft pharo package for Pharo 50
|
|
Docker seems pretty nice as well, with the added bonus that it can be hosted on Mac and Windows, and is probably a bit lighter since containers are not full-system.
About installing Pharo, I'd guess that the adhoc install procedure is a problem. Whatever the dependencies, it's easier for admins to install stuff if it's just another package that fits with the rest of their distribution. |
Re: ***Important*** Snapcraft pharo package for Pharo 50
|
|
There are docker images for Pharo already. Phil Le 6 janv. 2017 19:11, "Damien Pollet" <[hidden email]> a écrit :
|
Re: ***Important*** Snapcraft pharo package for Pharo 50
|
|
Yes we checked that with Damien and we should think about them for Pharo 60. On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 4:40 PM, [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote:
|
Re: ***Important*** Snapcraft pharo package for Pharo 50
|
|
In reply to this post by Dale Henrichs-3
On Fri, 06 Jan 2017 18:31:59 +0100, Dale Henrichs <[hidden email]> wrote:
I was talking about the sys admin and I think that there is a problem with the different libC and they do not want to mess everything because we did not plan it.
-- Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ |
Re: ***Important*** Snapcraft pharo package for Pharo 50
|
|
Then use the Centos VM It is for older libC. Phil Le 8 janv. 2017 20:01, "stepharong" <[hidden email]> a écrit :
|
Re: ***Important*** Snapcraft pharo package for Pharo 50
|
|
In reply to this post by Dale Henrichs-3
On 7 January 2017 at 04:31, Dale Henrichs
<[hidden email]> wrote: > Stef, > > RE: why they "cannot install Pharo" --- I'd guess it is because Pharo > requires 32 bit libraries and those are not available in the current Linux > releases by default ... to install the 32 bit libraries requires sudo > privileges and students aren't going to be able to do it themselves and the > sysadmins aren't going to want to have to add 32 bit libraries to a bunch of > linux machines just for pharo ... just a guess . > > Dale > > > On 01/06/2017 05:38 AM, Stephane Ducasse wrote: > > Hi pharoers > > I want to share with you my experience with trying to use Pharo at the > University here on Linux. > I think that they are on Ubuntu and ... the sys admin told me that they > cannot install Pharo :( > Since I'm not expert in Linux install I cannot help ;( > > So we will probably use windows. > Now they told me that what would be nice is to get a snap for Pharo > based on snapcraft.io. > > Does any of you have a snap description or willing to help so that we can > get > a snap for Pharo50? then for Pharo60? Disclaimer: I haven't ever developed a snap package, so this is just my understanding, no experience! Damien has already mentioned Docker, which may be a good solution - I'm not familiar enough to comment on the differences other than I expect that a snap package would be lower overhead. Snap packaging is being developed by Canonical, the maintainers of Ubuntu. The touted advantages over existing packaging formats such as ppa's include: - Applications are sandboxed, increasing security (the are known limitations with X11, but this is the goal) - All dependencies can be included in the package - this gets back to what Dale was saying about the 32 bit libraries, they could be included in, and limited to, the snap package. Having said that, I don't know if snap packages support 32bit applications. - They're cross platform. The snap runtime has been ported to many of the major linux distributions, e.g. fedora, arch, gentoo, etc. - They're supposed to be fairly easy to develop (compared to ppa's). If Pharo can be made to work as a snap package it would probably be a good replacement for the ppa (eventually, older OSs won't support them). Cheers, Alistair |
Re: ***Important*** Snapcraft pharo package for Pharo 50
|
|
Thanks
Yes we should have simpler/better packages for linux. > On 7 January 2017 at 04:31, Dale Henrichs > <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Stef, >> >> RE: why they "cannot install Pharo" --- I'd guess it is because Pharo >> requires 32 bit libraries and those are not available in the current >> Linux >> releases by default ... to install the 32 bit libraries requires sudo >> privileges and students aren't going to be able to do it themselves and >> the >> sysadmins aren't going to want to have to add 32 bit libraries to a >> bunch of >> linux machines just for pharo ... just a guess . >> >> Dale >> >> >> On 01/06/2017 05:38 AM, Stephane Ducasse wrote: >> >> Hi pharoers >> >> I want to share with you my experience with trying to use Pharo at the >> University here on Linux. >> I think that they are on Ubuntu and ... the sys admin told me that they >> cannot install Pharo :( >> Since I'm not expert in Linux install I cannot help ;( >> >> So we will probably use windows. >> Now they told me that what would be nice is to get a snap for Pharo >> based on snapcraft.io. >> >> Does any of you have a snap description or willing to help so that we >> can >> get >> a snap for Pharo50? then for Pharo60? > > Disclaimer: I haven't ever developed a snap package, so this is just > my understanding, no experience! > > Damien has already mentioned Docker, which may be a good solution - > I'm not familiar enough to comment on the differences other than I > expect that a snap package would be lower overhead. > > Snap packaging is being developed by Canonical, the maintainers of > Ubuntu. The touted advantages over existing packaging formats such as > ppa's include: > > - Applications are sandboxed, increasing security (the are known > limitations with X11, but this is the goal) > - All dependencies can be included in the package - this gets back to > what Dale was saying about the 32 bit libraries, they could be > included in, and limited to, the snap package. Having said that, I > don't know if snap packages support 32bit applications. > - They're cross platform. The snap runtime has been ported to many of > the major linux distributions, e.g. fedora, arch, gentoo, etc. > - They're supposed to be fairly easy to develop (compared to ppa's). > > If Pharo can be made to work as a snap package it would probably be a > good replacement for the ppa (eventually, older OSs won't support > them). > > Cheers, > Alistair > -- Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ |
Re: ***Important*** Snapcraft pharo package for Pharo 50
|
|
In reply to this post by EstebanLM
> On 6 Jan 2017, at 15:07, Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote: Hi! > looks same idea of http://openbuildservice.org, I hope this is easier (I never understood how to make OBS work for us… never had the time either :( ) The pharo-vm git repository gained creating a debian source package and I added auto-upload of it to OBS from travis-ci, with some extra packages (libsdl2) the same can be done for Ubuntu and one could create RPM .spec files (one to target multipke distributions). What is the current state of the Opensmalltalk-vm merge? It seems to be in progress and there some stability issues (e.g. unit tests are currently disabled)? Once the merge is done, tests are ran, I am happy to help using OBS to create packages for various Linux distributions. cheers holger |
|
|
> On 18 Jan 2017, at 13:47, Holger Freyther <[hidden email]> wrote: > > >> On 6 Jan 2017, at 15:07, Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Hi! > > >> looks same idea of http://openbuildservice.org, I hope this is easier (I never understood how to make OBS work for us… never had the time either :( ) > > The pharo-vm git repository gained creating a debian source package and I added auto-upload of it to OBS from travis-ci, with some extra packages (libsdl2) the same can be done for Ubuntu and one could create RPM .spec files (one to target multipke distributions). > > What is the current state of the Opensmalltalk-vm merge? It seems to be in progress and there some stability issues (e.g. unit tests are currently disabled)? > > Once the merge is done, tests are ran, I am happy to help using OBS to create packages for various Linux distributions. wow… this is super good, Holger, I want this since ages ! merge is done. there are 5 failing tests (and I still do not configure the tests for 64bits)… I will work a bit on this this week, but I’m finishing 3 things at the same time now (FFI 64bits, iceberg multi-remotes and this) so it will arrive… anytime soon. I wouldn’t wait until the tests are running :) cheers! Esteban > > cheers > holger |
Re: ***Important*** Snapcraft pharo package for Pharo 50
|
|
In reply to this post by Holger Freyther
This is super cool thanks for the help!
> >> On 6 Jan 2017, at 15:07, Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Hi! > > >> looks same idea of http://openbuildservice.org, I hope this is easier >> (I never understood how to make OBS work for us… never had the time >> either :( ) > > The pharo-vm git repository gained creating a debian source package and > I added auto-upload of it to OBS from travis-ci, with some extra > packages (libsdl2) the same can be done for Ubuntu and one could create > RPM .spec files (one to target multipke distributions). > > What is the current state of the Opensmalltalk-vm merge? It seems to be > in progress and there some stability issues (e.g. unit tests are > currently disabled)? > > Once the merge is done, tests are ran, I am happy to help using OBS to > create packages for various Linux distributions. > > cheers > holger -- Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ |
Re: ***Important*** Snapcraft pharo package for Pharo 50
|
|
In reply to this post by EstebanLM
> On 19 Jan 2017, at 00:25, Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Hi! > wow… this is super good, Holger, I want this since ages ! Great. The obs people will create a pharo organization for us. > merge is done. > there are 5 failing tests (and I still do not configure the tests for 64bits)… I will work a bit on this this week, but I’m finishing 3 things at the same time now (FFI 64bits, iceberg multi-remotes and this) so it will arrive… anytime soon. What is the state of the unit tests and which tests fail? Are these genuine regressions compared to the Pharo5 VM? > I wouldn’t wait until the tests are running :) I am struggling with the squeak-vm build system right now. It is doing so many things in a non-standard way and it is getting more and not less. I am currently struggling with the install part. To illustrate the challenge: * Standard systems would use DESTDIR as variable to not directly install to /usr/bin/foo but $(DESTDIR)/usr/bin/foo. Squeakvm has only "prefix" * There is a script to rename "squeak" to "pharo" after things were installed * It creates a "squeak" shell script that tries to find the real squeak, this will make dual (64bit, 32bit) installation more hard as well... let's see how far I get today holger |
«
Return to Pharo Smalltalk Developers
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |