Non-interactive package installation

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Non-interactive package installation

Igor Stasenko
Can someone, please enlighten me, is there any tools/packages for
making a subject possible?
I need something, which is fully automatic and don't makes any calls
to morphic (such as MC showing progress bar during install).
What options are available?

--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Non-interactive package installation

Markus Gälli-3
Hi Igor,

maybe you can resurrect my "Skip modal info dialogs" from
http://tinyurl.com/37njh6

I haven't used it in years and it also only supports the skipping of  
dialogs with only one "option" like "ok" etc.

Hope this helps

Markus

Am 05.02.2008 um 07:14 schrieb Igor Stasenko:

> Can someone, please enlighten me, is there any tools/packages for
> making a subject possible?
> I need something, which is fully automatic and don't makes any calls
> to morphic (such as MC showing progress bar during install).
> What options are available?
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Non-interactive package installation

Igor Stasenko
Well, the problems is deeper, in my case: any calls to morphic code is
not allowed during package installation.
The only thing which is allowed is using Transcript.
Btw, this topic related to another, about problems with installing
packages which modifying morphic code.

On 05/02/2008, Markus Gälli <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Igor,
>
> maybe you can resurrect my "Skip modal info dialogs" from
> http://tinyurl.com/37njh6
>
> I haven't used it in years and it also only supports the skipping of
> dialogs with only one "option" like "ok" etc.
>
> Hope this helps
>
> Markus
>
> Am 05.02.2008 um 07:14 schrieb Igor Stasenko:
>
> > Can someone, please enlighten me, is there any tools/packages for
> > making a subject possible?
> > I need something, which is fully automatic and don't makes any calls
> > to morphic (such as MC showing progress bar during install).
> > What options are available?
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
> >
>
>
>

--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Non-interactive package installation

Tom Phoenix
On Feb 5, 2008 7:54 AM, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Well, the problems is deeper, in my case: any calls to morphic code is
> not allowed during package installation.

No matter how we write the installation code, it will use *some* class
that doesn't like getting used while it's getting modified. Still, it
would be nice if the installation didn't require such high-level
things as Morphic.

In your situation, I'd try to hack the installation process. It's
probably just some method displaying a progress indicator, or
something like that. It should be pretty trivial to identify and
disable.

I think that's likely to succeed. If you're still stuck, ask again: I
have other ideas, but none of them are especially easy to do or to
describe. If you can share a small file that exhibits this
installation problem, other people (who can thereby replicate the
problem in their own images) may be able to help you see how to
install it.

Good luck with it!

--Tom Phoenix

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Non-interactive package installation

Igor Stasenko
On 05/02/2008, Tom Phoenix <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Feb 5, 2008 7:54 AM, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Well, the problems is deeper, in my case: any calls to morphic code is
> > not allowed during package installation.
>
> No matter how we write the installation code, it will use *some* class
> that doesn't like getting used while it's getting modified. Still, it
> would be nice if the installation didn't require such high-level
> things as Morphic.
>
> In your situation, I'd try to hack the installation process. It's
> probably just some method displaying a progress indicator, or
> something like that. It should be pretty trivial to identify and
> disable.
>
> I think that's likely to succeed. If you're still stuck, ask again: I
> have other ideas, but none of them are especially easy to do or to
> describe. If you can share a small file that exhibits this
> installation problem, other people (who can thereby replicate the
> problem in their own images) may be able to help you see how to
> install it.

I think i have to revoke my original question:
really, there can be packages with preamble scripts asking user to
choose some default options before continuing with installation, or in
post-amble, or at class initialization.

What is left, i think, is to make sure, that MC (or other installation
tool) should have options for making non-interactive installation (do
everything silently, without showing any progress bars e.t.c), then
packages which don't require any user attention can be installed
without interfering with morphic layer.

Squeak core is too focused on interaction with user. I'd like to see
someday a core functionality detached from UI, so squeak can run
happily in headless mode without need of having Display of any sort.

--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Non-interactive package installation

stephane ducasse
me too.
I have a problem right now because I'm trying to fix the fonts
but the system used them during updates
so if you find a solution let me know.

Stef
On Feb 5, 2008, at 6:08 PM, Igor Stasenko wrote:

> On 05/02/2008, Tom Phoenix <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On Feb 5, 2008 7:54 AM, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Well, the problems is deeper, in my case: any calls to morphic  
>>> code is
>>> not allowed during package installation.
>>
>> No matter how we write the installation code, it will use *some*  
>> class
>> that doesn't like getting used while it's getting modified. Still, it
>> would be nice if the installation didn't require such high-level
>> things as Morphic.
>>
>> In your situation, I'd try to hack the installation process. It's
>> probably just some method displaying a progress indicator, or
>> something like that. It should be pretty trivial to identify and
>> disable.
>>
>> I think that's likely to succeed. If you're still stuck, ask again: I
>> have other ideas, but none of them are especially easy to do or to
>> describe. If you can share a small file that exhibits this
>> installation problem, other people (who can thereby replicate the
>> problem in their own images) may be able to help you see how to
>> install it.
>
> I think i have to revoke my original question:
> really, there can be packages with preamble scripts asking user to
> choose some default options before continuing with installation, or in
> post-amble, or at class initialization.
>
> What is left, i think, is to make sure, that MC (or other installation
> tool) should have options for making non-interactive installation (do
> everything silently, without showing any progress bars e.t.c), then
> packages which don't require any user attention can be installed
> without interfering with morphic layer.
>
> Squeak core is too focused on interaction with user. I'd like to see
> someday a core functionality detached from UI, so squeak can run
> happily in headless mode without need of having Display of any sort.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Non-interactive package installation

Tom Phoenix
On Feb 5, 2008 3:00 PM, stephane ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I have a problem right now because I'm trying to fix the fonts
> but the system used them during updates
> so if you find a solution let me know.

What we really want is a general solution for the problem of how to
update class X safely when the update procedure uses class X.

Others have needed to do this more than once over the years, but it's
not easy. The answer is to create a new image file that has all the
objects you want, then run that. That is to say, in step two you'll
quit running whatever Squeak image you've been running and start
running the new one that you made in step one. In step one, you'll
make a new Squeak image file, and maybe the sources to go with it. See
what this page has to say about using SystemTracer, if you have to go
that route.

    http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/769

I don't know where you can get the original SystemTracer. You can find
SystemTracer2 on SqueakSource.

    http://www.squeaksource.com/SystemTracer2.html

Good luck with it!

--Tom Phoenix