Hi Nicolai, I'm a bit concerned that this is creating drift with the "official" Cog source base at http://www.squeakvm.org/svn/squeak/branches/Cog. Long filename support for win32 was recently added by Marcel Taumel in May of this year. Are you tracking that? How can we keep the sources harmonized? On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 4:44 AM, Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]> wrote:
_,,,^..^,,,_ best, Eliot |
2015-09-10 21:31 GMT+02:00 Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]>:
Yes, I know, and I already asked on the ML if we can take that change or if it is not possible because we have already other changes (pharos file plugin provides addition attributes (the file permissions)). But I got no response, so I tried to adopt Marcels change. And I only found the change for sqWin32FilePrims.c, but missed the other change that is necessary in sqWin32Directory.c (and asked on the ML). In the meantime Marcel added this but I could not find the changed source, only an updated vm. Is this change already comitted? I would love if someone else got this working. nicolai
|
Hi Nicolai,
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 1:17 PM, Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]> wrote:
Esteban and I just harmonized this. I'm (almost correctly) generating the plugin source such that one can define either PharoVM or not to chose between the different versions. I say "almost" because I'm currently spitting out #define PharoVM 0 ... #if PharoVM instead of #if !defined(PharoVM) # define PharoVM 0 #endif ... #if PharoVM but I'll fix it v soon.
I'm sorry I didn't see your message. Did you ask on vm-dev?
:-) I hear you :-)
_,,,^..^,,,_ best, Eliot |
2015-09-10 23:07 GMT+02:00 Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]>:
OK, I'll try to copy marcels solution
Ah, good. Now (I must be blind, but) I can not see the other change, shouldn't there be a "plugins" folder in Cog/platforms/win32/? Where are the changes to sqWin32FilePrims.c now?
I am not sure, maybe I only send it in the squeak-dev list
|
2015-09-11 9:43 GMT+02:00 Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]>:
Ok, found it. It is in the trunk branch :)
|
2015-09-11 9:44 GMT+02:00 Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]>:
No, wait, now I am confused. The change to sqWin32FilePrims.c is only in the trunk branch and the change to sqWin32Directory.c is only in the Cog branch. What branch includes the solution for both (sqWin32Directory.c and sqWin32FilePrims.c) and should be used for a merge into pharos vm repository?
|
Hi Nicolai,
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 12:48 AM, Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]> wrote:
There are two "externals" in the Cog branch: X platforms/win32/plugins X platforms/Cross/plugins So http://www.squeakvm.org/svn/squeak/branches/Cog is the Cog repository, but OK?
_,,,^..^,,,_ best, Eliot |
In reply to this post by Eliot Miranda-2
2015-09-10 21:31 GMT+02:00 Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]>:
Ok, I removed all of my code again and merged with sqWin32Directory.c and sqWin32FilePrims.c from the official cog source. I left only pharos additions for the fileattributes (posixpermissions) this should make it easier to merge which the squeak vm main branch (wrapped with pharo vm ifdefs). I'll create a push request. nicolai
|
Thanks Nicolai, that's great! I'll merge in your changes. Which files do I need to look at? On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]> wrote:
_,,,^..^,,,_ best, Eliot |
In reply to this post by Nicolai Hess
On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 11:00 PM, Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > 2015-09-10 21:31 GMT+02:00 Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]>: >> >> >> Hi Nicolai, >> >> I'm a bit concerned that this is creating drift with the "official" Cog source base at http://www.squeakvm.org/svn/squeak/branches/Cog. Long filename support for win32 was recently added by Marcel Taumel in May of this year. Are you tracking that? How can we keep the sources harmonized? > > > Ok, I removed all of my code again and merged with sqWin32Directory.c and sqWin32FilePrims.c from the official cog source. > I left only pharos additions for the fileattributes (posixpermissions) this should make it easier to merge which the > squeak vm main branch (wrapped with pharo vm ifdefs). What is the purpose of fileattributes? In the interests of further minimising drift, is this useful to Squeak? cheers -ben |
In reply to this post by Eliot Miranda-2
2015-09-14 23:10 GMT+02:00 Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]>:
I changed (removed my code, added Marcels) platforms/win32/plugins/FilePlugin/sqWin32FilePrims.c platforms/win32/vm/sqWin32.h platforms/win32/vm/sqWin32Directory.c I added (should be the same as in squeak vm repository) platforms/win32/plugins/FilePlugin/sqWin32FilePrims.c But my changes only about that code that already is in squeaks repository. If we want to merge some of the pharo-vm code into squeaks branch, we first need to wrap that code with some #ifdefs (For the win32 file/directory stuff, this would be code in platforms/win32/plugins/FilePlugin/sqWin32FilePrims.c platforms/win32/vm/sqWin32.h platforms/win32/vm/sqWin32Directory.c and platforms/Cross/plugins/FilePlugin/FilePlugin.h) Maybe Estaban should look at this, and tell which path he would follow to merge those changes.
|
In reply to this post by Ben Coman
2015-09-15 4:11 GMT+02:00 Ben Coman <[hidden email]>:
I don't know, I don't think we use it at all. And for the different platforms, the permission attributes doesn't really *are the same*. For example, the read/write permissions we are showing for win32 platform, don't have much to do with win32 access restrictions - Idon't know about macos. |
Pharo uses them. Windows uses also the posix permissions that came with MinGW… I do not think they are useful but we provide them anyway :) Esteban ps: I do not know what are you doing there guys, but you broke my builds (I’m taking a look at them now) :P
|
2015-09-15 11:40 GMT+02:00 Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]>:
I removed the mingw based permissions (mingws stat/lstat) because they are slow and don't work with longpath names (neither with real multibyte paths).
improbable, I didn't push the latest code change :)
|
mmm… but something needs to be returned. AFAIK mingw posix at least were answering if ro or rw available… but I’m not sure.
:) some changes in fileplugin were made in the spur branch and that broke the spur builds… but just looking at them now so I don’t know what it is yet. Esteban
|
just an undef of PharoVM… now I need to define it in compiler arguments.
|
In reply to this post by EstebanLM
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 11:40:48AM +0200, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: > > Pharo uses them. > > Posix permissions are useful for both linux and mac. > Windows uses also the posix permissions that came with MinGW??? I do not think they are useful but we provide them anyway :) Posix permissions are based on Unix, and are very platform specific. The Windows equivalents are semantically different, and other operating systems may exist that are not Unix based at all. IMO, platform specific functions should go into separate plugins, and not in FilePlugin. Dave > > Esteban > > ps: I do not know what are you doing there guys, but you broke my builds (I???m taking a look at them now) :P > > > On 15 Sep 2015, at 09:24, Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > > > > > 2015-09-15 4:11 GMT+02:00 Ben Coman <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>: > > > > On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 11:00 PM, Nicolai Hess <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > 2015-09-10 21:31 GMT+02:00 Eliot Miranda <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>: > > >> > > >> > > >> Hi Nicolai, > > >> > > >> I'm a bit concerned that this is creating drift with the "official" Cog source base at http://www.squeakvm.org/svn/squeak/branches/Cog <http://www.squeakvm.org/svn/squeak/branches/Cog>. Long filename support for win32 was recently added by Marcel Taumel in May of this year. Are you tracking that? How can we keep the sources harmonized? > > > > > > > > > Ok, I removed all of my code again and merged with sqWin32Directory.c and sqWin32FilePrims.c from the official cog source. > > > I left only pharos additions for the fileattributes (posixpermissions) this should make it easier to merge which the > > > squeak vm main branch (wrapped with pharo vm ifdefs). > > > > What is the purpose of fileattributes? In the interests of further > > minimising drift, is this useful to Squeak? > > cheers -ben > > > > I don't know, I don't think we use it at all. And for the different platforms, the permission attributes > > doesn't really *are the same*. For example, the read/write permissions we are showing for > > win32 platform, don't have much to do with win32 access restrictions - Idon't know about macos. > > > > > > > > > > > |
> On 15 Sep 2015, at 14:13, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 11:40:48AM +0200, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >> >> Pharo uses them. >> >> Posix permissions are useful for both linux and mac. >> Windows uses also the posix permissions that came with MinGW??? I do not think they are useful but we provide them anyway :) > > > Posix permissions are based on Unix, and are very platform specific. The > Windows equivalents are semantically different, and other operating systems > may exist that are not Unix based at all. > > IMO, platform specific functions should go into separate plugins, and not > in FilePlugin. well, I disagree :) I do not find this approach practical… because in general, there is no other systems that may exist using other permissions than POSIX. Except Windows, of course, but even for windows, there are compatibility layers that we can use. In the case of the FilePlugin extensions, we choose to stay POSIX because in general, as its been said before, the job of a virtual machine is been virtual: to provide an “abstract machine” common for everything in the image. I’m not saying that this is possible and even desirable in all cases, but it should be something to think about. In that case, we could design a common file permissions different to the one of Windows and different to POSIX, but I think POSIX does the job just fine. Also, the choice was: POSIX or nothing (because we didn’t have anything before). I would be very happy if we agree in a better solution, and we implement it. But in the mean time, a not perfect solution is better than none. Esteban > > Dave > > > >> >> Esteban >> >> ps: I do not know what are you doing there guys, but you broke my builds (I???m taking a look at them now) :P >> >>> On 15 Sep 2015, at 09:24, Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> 2015-09-15 4:11 GMT+02:00 Ben Coman <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>: >>> >>> On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 11:00 PM, Nicolai Hess <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 2015-09-10 21:31 GMT+02:00 Eliot Miranda <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi Nicolai, >>>>> >>>>> I'm a bit concerned that this is creating drift with the "official" Cog source base at http://www.squeakvm.org/svn/squeak/branches/Cog <http://www.squeakvm.org/svn/squeak/branches/Cog>. Long filename support for win32 was recently added by Marcel Taumel in May of this year. Are you tracking that? How can we keep the sources harmonized? >>>> >>>> >>>> Ok, I removed all of my code again and merged with sqWin32Directory.c and sqWin32FilePrims.c from the official cog source. >>>> I left only pharos additions for the fileattributes (posixpermissions) this should make it easier to merge which the >>>> squeak vm main branch (wrapped with pharo vm ifdefs). >>> >>> What is the purpose of fileattributes? In the interests of further >>> minimising drift, is this useful to Squeak? >>> cheers -ben >>> >>> I don't know, I don't think we use it at all. And for the different platforms, the permission attributes >>> doesn't really *are the same*. For example, the read/write permissions we are showing for >>> win32 platform, don't have much to do with win32 access restrictions - Idon't know about macos. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > |
Hi David,
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote:
I agree with Esteban. IMO, the model of files that the FilePlugin provides access to can and should be a superset of facilities. By not supporting facilities such as permissions or symbolic links or active mount-points we hobble our core file functionality and that makes us a very weak scripting platform. Putting these facilities in add-on packages makes configuration more difficult and means that an elegant implementation in the core file classes, with fallbacks for platforms that don't support the concepts, is very difficult. If we want to support unix-style scripting in Pharo and Squeak (and I think we very much do; there are many areas out there where good scripting is essential) then we need a better File model, and that means not just getting rid of FileDirectory et al, it also means providing the right infrastructure in the FilePlugin, and that means extensions like the one the Pharo VM folks made. Indeed they haven't gone nearly far enough IMO.
_,,,^..^,,,_ best, Eliot |
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 10:45:16AM -0700, Eliot Miranda wrote: > > Hi David, > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> > wrote: > > > > > > On 15 Sep 2015, at 14:13, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 11:40:48AM +0200, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: > > >> > > >> Pharo uses them. > > >> > > >> Posix permissions are useful for both linux and mac. > > >> Windows uses also the posix permissions that came with MinGW??? I do > > not think they are useful but we provide them anyway :) > > > > > > > > > Posix permissions are based on Unix, and are very platform specific. The > > > Windows equivalents are semantically different, and other operating > > systems > > > may exist that are not Unix based at all. > > > > > > IMO, platform specific functions should go into separate plugins, and not > > > in FilePlugin. > > > > well, I disagree :) > > I do not find this approach practical??? because in general, there is no > > other systems that may exist using other permissions than POSIX. Except > > Windows, of course, but even for windows, there are compatibility layers > > that we can use. > > In the case of the FilePlugin extensions, we choose to stay POSIX because > > in general, as its been said before, the job of a virtual machine is been > > virtual: to provide an ???abstract machine??? common for everything in the > > image. I???m not saying that this is possible and even desirable in all > > cases, but it should be something to think about. > > In that case, we could design a common file permissions different to the > > one of Windows and different to POSIX, but I think POSIX does the job just > > fine. > > > > Also, the choice was: POSIX or nothing (because we didn???t have anything > > before). > > I would be very happy if we agree in a better solution, and we implement > > it. > > But in the mean time, a not perfect solution is better than none. > > > > I agree with Esteban. IMO, the model of files that the FilePlugin provides > access to can and should be a superset of facilities. By not supporting > facilities such as permissions or symbolic links or active mount-points we > hobble our core file functionality and that makes us a very weak scripting > platform. Putting these facilities in add-on packages makes configuration > more difficult and means that an elegant implementation in the core file > classes, with fallbacks for platforms that don't support the concepts, is > very difficult. I do not intend to suggest that these things are not wonderful and good and worthy of being done. What I said is that they should not be put into FilePlugin. Yes it is more difficult to implement features like this in packages, but with all due respect it's not all *that* terribly hard. And I think the too much work argument does not hold up when we are talking about something like FilePlugin that effectively defines minimal core functionality required to bring up an image on a new platform. > > If we want to support unix-style scripting in Pharo and Squeak (and I think > we very much do; there are many areas out there where good scripting is > essential) then we need a better File model, and that means not just > getting rid of FileDirectory et al, it also means providing the right > infrastructure in the FilePlugin, and that means extensions like the one > the Pharo VM folks made. Indeed they haven't gone nearly far enough IMO. Again, I am not saying that these things should not be done. Just that with respect to platform-specific features that can only ever work on a Unix based system, allowing these to creep into the feature set of base system does not seem like a very good idea to me. That's all I am saying. Dave |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |