Packaging of 4.1?

>
> Hi all.
>
> How should the next version of Squeak be packaged?
>
> I currently use Linux, mostly from the command line. To install
> Squeak, I need to go through a fairly involved (but for me, mostly
> automatic) process:
> 1. Make a new directory.
> 2. Download the zip file containing image and changes files.
> 3. Unzip and RENAME them to squeak.image, squeak.changes, in the new directory.
> 4. Find the relevant sources file (now there are several of them!) and
> copy / symlink it to that dir.
> 5. Find the right VM I want (I have several, some self-compiled) and
> copy / symlink to that dir with the plugins I want.
>
> I would not expect new users to do all this.
>
> How do you install and run Squeak?
>
> How can we make it easier for new users?
>
> I believe that most people use a standard desktop environment these
> days: Mac, Windows, Gnome, KDE or LXDE. The common features I see that
> would be useful are:
> * File associations / MIME types that start applications.
> * In a file browser, a "Create new" menu that uses templates.
>
> What would be nice is that a Squeak installer creates a file
> association for an image file so that the users can just double-click
> it, and that the file browser's "Create new" menu contains an option
> to make a new Squeak image.
>
> Web browsers often complain on start-up if they aren't properly
> associated with HTML files. Can we do this in Squeak?
>
> Is the ".image" extension the best one to use? Is another file
> extension, such as ".cryodessication" perhaps better?
>
> Gulik.
>
> --
> http://gulik.pbwiki.com/

> On 19.03.2010, at 21:35, Michael van der Gulik wrote:
>>
>> Hi all.
>>
>> How should the next version of Squeak be packaged?
>>
>> I currently use Linux, mostly from the command line. To install
>> Squeak, I need to go through a fairly involved (but for me, mostly
>> automatic) process:
>> 1. Make a new directory.
>> 2. Download the zip file containing image and changes files.
>> 3. Unzip and RENAME them to squeak.image, squeak.changes, in the new directory.
>> 4. Find the relevant sources file (now there are several of them!) and
>> copy / symlink it to that dir.
>> 5. Find the right VM I want (I have several, some self-compiled) and
>> copy / symlink to that dir with the plugins I want.
>>
>> I would not expect new users to do all this.
>>
>> How do you install and run Squeak?
>>
>> How can we make it easier for new users?
>>
>> I believe that most people use a standard desktop environment these
>> days: Mac, Windows, Gnome, KDE or LXDE. The common features I see that
>> would be useful are:
>> * File associations / MIME types that start applications.
>> * In a file browser, a "Create new" menu that uses templates.
>>
>> What would be nice is that a Squeak installer creates a file
>> association for an image file so that the users can just double-click
>> it, and that the file browser's "Create new" menu contains an option
>> to make a new Squeak image.
>>
>> Web browsers often complain on start-up if they aren't properly
>> associated with HTML files. Can we do this in Squeak?
>>
>> Is the ".image" extension the best one to use? Is another file
>> extension, such as ".cryodessication" perhaps better?
>>
>> Gulik.
>>
>> --
>> http://gulik.pbwiki.com/
>
> I intentionally waited a couple of days before responding. As usual, this topic has little interest :(
>
> IMHO when working on packaging for Linux in particular, we need to do that together with the distro maintainers. Wouldn't it be nice if all you needed to do to get the latest Squeak would be "apt-get install squeak" or "yum install squeak"? In fact this works for Etoys already. Not perfectly, but we're getting there. And with the license-clean 4.0 it would be possible to package Squeak itself now too.
>
> The topic comes up from time to time. See for example my message here:
> https://lists.launchpad.net/scratch/msg00087.html
>
> Also, I try to keep track of the etoys and squeak-vm packages in various distros:
> http://wiki.squeakland.org/display/sq/Bug+Tracking
>
> - Bert -
>
>
>
>

> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 7:56 AM, Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On 19.03.2010, at 21:35, Michael van der Gulik wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all.
>>>
>>> How should the next version of Squeak be packaged?
>>>
>>> I currently use Linux, mostly from the command line. To install
>>> Squeak, I need to go through a fairly involved (but for me, mostly
>>> automatic) process:
>>> 1. Make a new directory.
>>> 2. Download the zip file containing image and changes files.
>>> 3. Unzip and RENAME them to squeak.image, squeak.changes, in the new directory.
>>> 4. Find the relevant sources file (now there are several of them!) and
>>> copy / symlink it to that dir.
>>> 5. Find the right VM I want (I have several, some self-compiled) and
>>> copy / symlink to that dir with the plugins I want.
>>>
>>> I would not expect new users to do all this.
>>>
>>> How do you install and run Squeak?
>>>
>>> How can we make it easier for new users?
>>>
>>> I believe that most people use a standard desktop environment these
>>> days: Mac, Windows, Gnome, KDE or LXDE. The common features I see that
>>> would be useful are:
>>> * File associations / MIME types that start applications.
>>> * In a file browser, a "Create new" menu that uses templates.
>>>
>>> What would be nice is that a Squeak installer creates a file
>>> association for an image file so that the users can just double-click
>>> it, and that the file browser's "Create new" menu contains an option
>>> to make a new Squeak image.
>>>
>>> Web browsers often complain on start-up if they aren't properly
>>> associated with HTML files. Can we do this in Squeak?
>>>
>>> Is the ".image" extension the best one to use? Is another file
>>> extension, such as ".cryodessication" perhaps better?
>>>
>>> Gulik.
>>>
>>> --
>>> http://gulik.pbwiki.com/
>>
>> I intentionally waited a couple of days before responding. As usual, this topic has little interest :(
>>
>> IMHO when working on packaging for Linux in particular, we need to do that together with the distro maintainers. Wouldn't it be nice if all you needed to do to get the latest Squeak would be "apt-get install squeak" or "yum install squeak"? In fact this works for Etoys already. Not perfectly, but we're getting there. And with the license-clean 4.0 it would be possible to package Squeak itself now too.
>>
>> The topic comes up from time to time. See for example my message here:
>> https://lists.launchpad.net/scratch/msg00087.html
>>
>> Also, I try to keep track of the etoys and squeak-vm packages in various distros:
>> http://wiki.squeakland.org/display/sq/Bug+Tracking
>>
>> - Bert -
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

> On 23.03.2010, at 16:13, Chris Muller wrote:
>>
>> Well, I, too, am fairly interested in the topic, but was waiting for
>> some of the other Linux experts to respond so I could learn something!
>> Personally, I find installation of the Linux VM to be a pain in the
>> ass.  In particular, I don't understand why the package is zipped
>> including the full directory structure (from root /), rather than just
>> a flat or the two-layers (lib and bin) that are needed..  Unless I'm
>> missing something, this makes installation of the VM a very manual,
>> multi-step process..
>
> You're supposed to run the INSTALL script. Besides, installing from tarballs is supposed to be painful, to keep people from doing it, unless they in fact know what they are doing ;)
>
> That said, which Linux are you on? The VM might be in the distro already. That would always be the preferable way.
>
> - Bert -
>
>> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 7:56 AM, Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> On 19.03.2010, at 21:35, Michael van der Gulik wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi all.
>>>>
>>>> How should the next version of Squeak be packaged?
>>>>
>>>> I currently use Linux, mostly from the command line. To install
>>>> Squeak, I need to go through a fairly involved (but for me, mostly
>>>> automatic) process:
>>>> 1. Make a new directory.
>>>> 2. Download the zip file containing image and changes files.
>>>> 3. Unzip and RENAME them to squeak.image, squeak.changes, in the new directory.
>>>> 4. Find the relevant sources file (now there are several of them!) and
>>>> copy / symlink it to that dir.
>>>> 5. Find the right VM I want (I have several, some self-compiled) and
>>>> copy / symlink to that dir with the plugins I want.
>>>>
>>>> I would not expect new users to do all this.
>>>>
>>>> How do you install and run Squeak?
>>>>
>>>> How can we make it easier for new users?
>>>>
>>>> I believe that most people use a standard desktop environment these
>>>> days: Mac, Windows, Gnome, KDE or LXDE. The common features I see that
>>>> would be useful are:
>>>> * File associations / MIME types that start applications.
>>>> * In a file browser, a "Create new" menu that uses templates.
>>>>
>>>> What would be nice is that a Squeak installer creates a file
>>>> association for an image file so that the users can just double-click
>>>> it, and that the file browser's "Create new" menu contains an option
>>>> to make a new Squeak image.
>>>>
>>>> Web browsers often complain on start-up if they aren't properly
>>>> associated with HTML files. Can we do this in Squeak?
>>>>
>>>> Is the ".image" extension the best one to use? Is another file
>>>> extension, such as ".cryodessication" perhaps better?
>>>>
>>>> Gulik.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> http://gulik.pbwiki.com/
>>>
>>> I intentionally waited a couple of days before responding. As usual, this topic has little interest :(
>>>
>>> IMHO when working on packaging for Linux in particular, we need to do that together with the distro maintainers. Wouldn't it be nice if all you needed to do to get the latest Squeak would be "apt-get install squeak" or "yum install squeak"? In fact this works for Etoys already. Not perfectly, but we're getting there. And with the license-clean 4.0 it would be possible to package Squeak itself now too.
>>>
>>> The topic comes up from time to time. See for example my message here:
>>> https://lists.launchpad.net/scratch/msg00087.html
>>>
>>> Also, I try to keep track of the etoys and squeak-vm packages in various distros:
>>> http://wiki.squeakland.org/display/sq/Bug+Tracking
>>>
>>> - Bert -
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>

>
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On 23.03.2010, at 16:13, Chris Muller wrote:
>>>
>>> Well, I, too, am fairly interested in the topic, but was waiting for
>>> some of the other Linux experts to respond so I could learn something!
>>> Personally, I find installation of the Linux VM to be a pain in the
>>> ass.  In particular, I don't understand why the package is zipped
>>> including the full directory structure (from root /), rather than just
>>> a flat or the two-layers (lib and bin) that are needed..  Unless I'm
>>> missing something, this makes installation of the VM a very manual,
>>> multi-step process..
>>
>> You're supposed to run the INSTALL script. Besides, installing from tarballs is supposed to be painful, to keep people from doing it, unless they in fact know what they are doing ;)
>>
>> That said, which Linux are you on? The VM might be in the distro already. That would always be the preferable way.
>>
>> - Bert -
>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 7:56 AM, Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> On 19.03.2010, at 21:35, Michael van der Gulik wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi all.
>>>>>
>>>>> How should the next version of Squeak be packaged?
>>>>>
>>>>> I currently use Linux, mostly from the command line. To install
>>>>> Squeak, I need to go through a fairly involved (but for me, mostly
>>>>> automatic) process:
>>>>> 1. Make a new directory.
>>>>> 2. Download the zip file containing image and changes files.
>>>>> 3. Unzip and RENAME them to squeak.image, squeak.changes, in the new directory.
>>>>> 4. Find the relevant sources file (now there are several of them!) and
>>>>> copy / symlink it to that dir.
>>>>> 5. Find the right VM I want (I have several, some self-compiled) and
>>>>> copy / symlink to that dir with the plugins I want.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would not expect new users to do all this.
>>>>>
>>>>> How do you install and run Squeak?
>>>>>
>>>>> How can we make it easier for new users?
>>>>>
>>>>> I believe that most people use a standard desktop environment these
>>>>> days: Mac, Windows, Gnome, KDE or LXDE. The common features I see that
>>>>> would be useful are:
>>>>> * File associations / MIME types that start applications.
>>>>> * In a file browser, a "Create new" menu that uses templates.
>>>>>
>>>>> What would be nice is that a Squeak installer creates a file
>>>>> association for an image file so that the users can just double-click
>>>>> it, and that the file browser's "Create new" menu contains an option
>>>>> to make a new Squeak image.
>>>>>
>>>>> Web browsers often complain on start-up if they aren't properly
>>>>> associated with HTML files. Can we do this in Squeak?
>>>>>
>>>>> Is the ".image" extension the best one to use? Is another file
>>>>> extension, such as ".cryodessication" perhaps better?
>>>>>
>>>>> Gulik.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> http://gulik.pbwiki.com/
>>>>
>>>> I intentionally waited a couple of days before responding. As usual, this topic has little interest :(
>>>>
>>>> IMHO when working on packaging for Linux in particular, we need to do that together with the distro maintainers. Wouldn't it be nice if all you needed to do to get the latest Squeak would be "apt-get install squeak" or "yum install squeak"? In fact this works for Etoys already. Not perfectly, but we're getting there. And with the license-clean 4.0 it would be possible to package Squeak itself now too.
>>>>
>>>> The topic comes up from time to time. See for example my message here:
>>>> https://lists.launchpad.net/scratch/msg00087.html
>>>>
>>>> Also, I try to keep track of the etoys and squeak-vm packages in various distros:
>>>> http://wiki.squeakland.org/display/sq/Bug+Tracking
>>>>
>>>> - Bert -
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

> On 23.03.2010, at 18:04, Chris Muller wrote:
>>
>> Ubuntu.. umm, 8.04 I think (why don't they put version # under Help |
>> About?).  I couldn't get the INSTALL script to work, but can't
>> remember what the issue was..  It might have been that the directory
>> structure in the tarball was different than the standard Ubuntu
>> system.
>
> That's one of the reasons I advocate using the distro packages. The packer knows exactly where things need to go in a particular system. But it's impossible for the upstream maintainer to know all the specifics of each distro - it necessarily assumes a generic layout.
>
>> The instructions should be clear and step-by-step.  There should be no
>> confusion about where to untar the downloaded file, from where to run
>> the INSTALL script and whether the users must become root first or use
>> sudo..
>
> What exactly do you find unclear in the instructions?
>
> http://squeakvm.org/unix/download.html
>
> - Bert -
>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> On 23.03.2010, at 16:13, Chris Muller wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Well, I, too, am fairly interested in the topic, but was waiting for
>>>> some of the other Linux experts to respond so I could learn something!
>>>> Personally, I find installation of the Linux VM to be a pain in the
>>>> ass.  In particular, I don't understand why the package is zipped
>>>> including the full directory structure (from root /), rather than just
>>>> a flat or the two-layers (lib and bin) that are needed..  Unless I'm
>>>> missing something, this makes installation of the VM a very manual,
>>>> multi-step process..
>>>
>>> You're supposed to run the INSTALL script. Besides, installing from tarballs is supposed to be painful, to keep people from doing it, unless they in fact know what they are doing ;)
>>>
>>> That said, which Linux are you on? The VM might be in the distro already. That would always be the preferable way.
>>>
>>> - Bert -
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 7:56 AM, Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>> On 19.03.2010, at 21:35, Michael van der Gulik wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How should the next version of Squeak be packaged?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I currently use Linux, mostly from the command line. To install
>>>>>> Squeak, I need to go through a fairly involved (but for me, mostly
>>>>>> automatic) process:
>>>>>> 1. Make a new directory.
>>>>>> 2. Download the zip file containing image and changes files.
>>>>>> 3. Unzip and RENAME them to squeak.image, squeak.changes, in the new directory.
>>>>>> 4. Find the relevant sources file (now there are several of them!) and
>>>>>> copy / symlink it to that dir.
>>>>>> 5. Find the right VM I want (I have several, some self-compiled) and
>>>>>> copy / symlink to that dir with the plugins I want.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would not expect new users to do all this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How do you install and run Squeak?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How can we make it easier for new users?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I believe that most people use a standard desktop environment these
>>>>>> days: Mac, Windows, Gnome, KDE or LXDE. The common features I see that
>>>>>> would be useful are:
>>>>>> * File associations / MIME types that start applications.
>>>>>> * In a file browser, a "Create new" menu that uses templates.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What would be nice is that a Squeak installer creates a file
>>>>>> association for an image file so that the users can just double-click
>>>>>> it, and that the file browser's "Create new" menu contains an option
>>>>>> to make a new Squeak image.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Web browsers often complain on start-up if they aren't properly
>>>>>> associated with HTML files. Can we do this in Squeak?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is the ".image" extension the best one to use? Is another file
>>>>>> extension, such as ".cryodessication" perhaps better?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gulik.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> http://gulik.pbwiki.com/
>>>>>
>>>>> I intentionally waited a couple of days before responding. As usual, this topic has little interest :(
>>>>>
>>>>> IMHO when working on packaging for Linux in particular, we need to do that together with the distro maintainers. Wouldn't it be nice if all you needed to do to get the latest Squeak would be "apt-get install squeak" or "yum install squeak"? In fact this works for Etoys already. Not perfectly, but we're getting there. And with the license-clean 4.0 it would be possible to package Squeak itself now too.
>>>>>
>>>>> The topic comes up from time to time. See for example my message here:
>>>>> https://lists.launchpad.net/scratch/msg00087.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, I try to keep track of the etoys and squeak-vm packages in various distros:
>>>>> http://wiki.squeakland.org/display/sq/Bug+Tracking
>>>>>
>>>>> - Bert -
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>

> On 23.03.2010, at 16:13, Chris Muller wrote:
>>
>> Well, I, too, am fairly interested in the topic, but was waiting for
>> some of the other Linux experts to respond so I could learn something!
>> Personally, I find installation of the Linux VM to be a pain in the
>> ass.  In particular, I don't understand why the package is zipped
>> including the full directory structure (from root /), rather than just
>> a flat or the two-layers (lib and bin) that are needed..  Unless I'm
>> missing something, this makes installation of the VM a very manual,
>> multi-step process..
>
> You're supposed to run the INSTALL script. Besides, installing from tarballs is supposed to be painful, to keep people from doing it, unless they in fact know what they are doing ;)
>
> That said, which Linux are you on? The VM might be in the distro already. That would always be the preferable way.

>
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 5:00 AM, Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On 23.03.2010, at 16:13, Chris Muller wrote:
>>>
>>> Well, I, too, am fairly interested in the topic, but was waiting for
>>> some of the other Linux experts to respond so I could learn something!
>>> Personally, I find installation of the Linux VM to be a pain in the
>>> ass.  In particular, I don't understand why the package is zipped
>>> including the full directory structure (from root /), rather than just
>>> a flat or the two-layers (lib and bin) that are needed..  Unless I'm
>>> missing something, this makes installation of the VM a very manual,
>>> multi-step process..
>>
>> You're supposed to run the INSTALL script. Besides, installing from tarballs is supposed to be painful, to keep people from doing it, unless they in fact know what they are doing ;)
>>
>> That said, which Linux are you on? The VM might be in the distro already. That would always be the preferable way.
>
> It seems there aren't many Linux users.
>
> I use Ubuntu, but I won't use the VMs that come with the distro
> because I usually compile my own. Sometimes I need debugging symbols
> in the VM, sometimes I have a few custom changes.
>
> My issues with the way squeak is currently packaged are:
>
> * Like Chris says, the tarball for the Linux VM is odd. I'd prefer it
> followed the conventions for tarballed binaries.
>
> * The bits and pieces you need are spread over several downloadable
> files. Why can't the VM, image, and sources files all be in the same
> downloadable tarball or zip file?
>
> * The image and changes files aren't called "squeak.image" and "squeak.changes".
>
> * There's no Readme.txt file, no installation instructions or anything
> when you download "the latest release". You get an image file and a
> changes file, and you're expected to know what to do with them.
>
> As a fairly experienced user, I can cope with this, but I feel sorry
> for any new users of Squeak.
>
> Gulik.
>
> --
> http://gulik.pbwiki.com/