Smalltalk › Squeak › Squeak - Dev

[Test][Squeak5.2rc1][SqueakMap] FFI entry in SqueakMap catalog for 5.2?

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

24 messages Options

Hannes Hirzel

[Test][Squeak5.2rc1][SqueakMap] FFI entry in SqueakMap catalog for 5.2?

Hello

All tests Loading FFI into Sque

The load script for FFI is 'community supported' in SqueakMap.

The relevant FFI entry has as load script is just

Installer new merge: #ffiTests

This still applies for 5.2.

However the last time FFI shows up in the SqueakMap client list for a
particular release is version 4.5.

Not in 4.6, 5.0 and 5.1

What do I need to do to make it appear in the list for 5.2.

Creating a release for 5.2 would be an option but that seems
unnecessary as it had not been done for 4.5 either.

Suggestions how to proceed?

Regards
Hannes

Loading_FFI_into_Squeak5.2_Screenshot from 2018-10-11.png (141K) Download Attachment

Squeak5.2rc1_FFI_tests_Screenshot.png (35K) Download Attachment

Chris Muller-3

Re: [Test][Squeak5.2rc1][SqueakMap] FFI entry in SqueakMap catalog for 5.2?

Hi Hannes,

It depends on what all we want do the work to catalog. "Installer new
merge: #ffiTests" just loads the latest versions of all the packages,
not a fixed configuration, so that script is not suitable to tag with
any Squeak-specific versions, only the (head) version. If you want to
make one for 5.2, we must use a totally different script which
specifies the exact version #'s of all the packages, so we know it
will always work in 5.2. You could copy & paste one of the scripts
for one of my packages (Magma, etc.) which I just updated yesterday,
BTW...

Best,
Chris

> The relevant FFI entry has as load script is just
>
> Installer new merge: #ffiTests
>
> This still applies for 5.2.
>
> However the last time FFI shows up in the SqueakMap client list for a
> particular release is version 4.5.
>
> Not in 4.6, 5.0 and 5.1
>
> What do I need to do to make it appear in the list for 5.2.
>
> Creating a release for 5.2 would be an option but that seems
> unnecessary as it had not been done for 4.5 either.
>
> Suggestions how to proceed?
>
> Regards
> Hannes
>

Hannes Hirzel

Re: [Test][Squeak5.2rc1][SqueakMap] FFI entry in SqueakMap catalog for 5.2?

Hi Chris

I think that just

Installer new merge: #ffiTests

is good enough. Like it was for earlier version. I tested it and it worked.

I just wonder what I need to do that it shows up in the list of
available packages for 5.2?

--Hannes

On 10/12/18, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Hannes,
>
> It depends on what all we want do the work to catalog. "Installer new
> merge: #ffiTests" just loads the latest versions of all the packages,
> not a fixed configuration, so that script is not suitable to tag with
> any Squeak-specific versions, only the (head) version. If you want to
> make one for 5.2, we must use a totally different script which
> specifies the exact version #'s of all the packages, so we know it
> will always work in 5.2. You could copy & paste one of the scripts
> for one of my packages (Magma, etc.) which I just updated yesterday,
> BTW...
>
> Best,
> Chris
>
>> The relevant FFI entry has as load script is just
>>
>> Installer new merge: #ffiTests
>>
>> This still applies for 5.2.
>>
>> However the last time FFI shows up in the SqueakMap client list for a
>> particular release is version 4.5.
>>
>> Not in 4.6, 5.0 and 5.1
>>
>> What do I need to do to make it appear in the list for 5.2.
>>
>> Creating a release for 5.2 would be an option but that seems
>> unnecessary as it had not been done for 4.5 either.
>>
>> Suggestions how to proceed?
>>
>> Regards
>> Hannes
>>
>
>

Chris Muller-4

Re: [Test][Squeak5.2rc1][SqueakMap] FFI entry in SqueakMap catalog for 5.2?

Hi Hannes,

I think you did not understand. Just because you "tested it and it
worked" TODAY does not mean that script will continue working forever.
That's why we MUST NOT put a "Squeak 5.2" tag on it unless we make a
separate Release with a script that uses explicitly-specified
versions.

That's what we have now, I see no versions of "FFI" for 4.5, only
(head), 3.10, and 3.9. The last two were published by Andreas.

HTH,
Chris
On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 2:36 PM H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Hi Chris
>
> I think that just
>
> Installer new merge: #ffiTests
>
> is good enough. Like it was for earlier version. I tested it and it worked.
>
> I just wonder what I need to do that it shows up in the list of
> available packages for 5.2?
>
> --Hannes
>
> On 10/12/18, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Hi Hannes,
> >
> > It depends on what all we want do the work to catalog. "Installer new
> > merge: #ffiTests" just loads the latest versions of all the packages,
> > not a fixed configuration, so that script is not suitable to tag with
> > any Squeak-specific versions, only the (head) version. If you want to
> > make one for 5.2, we must use a totally different script which
> > specifies the exact version #'s of all the packages, so we know it
> > will always work in 5.2. You could copy & paste one of the scripts
> > for one of my packages (Magma, etc.) which I just updated yesterday,
> > BTW...
> >
> > Best,
> > Chris
> >
> >> The relevant FFI entry has as load script is just
> >>
> >> Installer new merge: #ffiTests
> >>
> >> This still applies for 5.2.
> >>
> >> However the last time FFI shows up in the SqueakMap client list for a
> >> particular release is version 4.5.
> >>
> >> Not in 4.6, 5.0 and 5.1
> >>
> >> What do I need to do to make it appear in the list for 5.2.
> >>
> >> Creating a release for 5.2 would be an option but that seems
> >> unnecessary as it had not been done for 4.5 either.
> >>
> >> Suggestions how to proceed?
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Hannes
> >>
> >
> >

Hannes Hirzel

Re: [Test][Squeak5.2rc1][SqueakMap] FFI entry in SqueakMap catalog for 5.2?

Hi Chris

On 10/12/18, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi Hannes,
>
> I think you did not understand. Just because you "tested it and it
> worked" TODAY does not mean that script will continue working forever.

There is no such claim. The claim is just that it still works for 5.2.

> That's why we MUST NOT put a "Squeak 5.2" tag on it unless we make a
> separate Release with a script that uses explicitly-specified
> versions.

> That's what we have now, I see no versions of "FFI" for 4.5, only
> (head), 3.10, and 3.9. The last two were published by Andreas.

And that contains

Installer new merge: #ffiTests'

That means this script has been working since 3.9, i.e. for 10 years.

--Hannes

> HTH,
> Chris
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 2:36 PM H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Chris
>>
>> I think that just
>>
>> Installer new merge: #ffiTests
>>
>> is good enough. Like it was for earlier version. I tested it and it
>> worked.
>>
>> I just wonder what I need to do that it shows up in the list of
>> available packages for 5.2?
>>
>> --Hannes
>>
>> On 10/12/18, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > Hi Hannes,
>> >
>> > It depends on what all we want do the work to catalog. "Installer new
>> > merge: #ffiTests" just loads the latest versions of all the packages,
>> > not a fixed configuration, so that script is not suitable to tag with
>> > any Squeak-specific versions, only the (head) version. If you want to
>> > make one for 5.2, we must use a totally different script which
>> > specifies the exact version #'s of all the packages, so we know it
>> > will always work in 5.2. You could copy & paste one of the scripts
>> > for one of my packages (Magma, etc.) which I just updated yesterday,
>> > BTW...
>> >
>> > Best,
>> > Chris
>> >
>> >> The relevant FFI entry has as load script is just
>> >>
>> >> Installer new merge: #ffiTests
>> >>
>> >> This still applies for 5.2.
>> >>
>> >> However the last time FFI shows up in the SqueakMap client list for a
>> >> particular release is version 4.5.
>> >>
>> >> Not in 4.6, 5.0 and 5.1
>> >>
>> >> What do I need to do to make it appear in the list for 5.2.
>> >>
>> >> Creating a release for 5.2 would be an option but that seems
>> >> unnecessary as it had not been done for 4.5 either.
>> >>
>> >> Suggestions how to proceed?
>> >>
>> >> Regards
>> >> Hannes
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>

David T. Lewis

Re: [Test][Squeak5.2rc1][SqueakMap] FFI entry in SqueakMap catalog for 5.2?

On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 10:05:40PM +0200, H. Hirzel wrote:
> Hi Chris
>
> On 10/12/18, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Hi Hannes,
> >
> > I think you did not understand. Just because you "tested it and it
> > worked" TODAY does not mean that script will continue working forever.
>
> There is no such claim. The claim is just that it still works for 5.2.

+1

>
> > That's why we MUST NOT put a "Squeak 5.2" tag on it unless we make a
> > separate Release with a script that uses explicitly-specified
> > versions.
>
> > That's what we have now, I see no versions of "FFI" for 4.5, only
> > (head), 3.10, and 3.9. The last two were published by Andreas.
>
> And that contains
>
> Installer new merge: #ffiTests'
>
> That means this script has been working since 3.9, i.e. for 10 years.

+1

We do need some way to deal with this use case.

"Make another release of your package every time somebody in
Squeak/Cuis/Pharo decides to announce a new release of their image"
is not really a very good answer. It kind of works but ... yuk.

In user story jargon:

As an external package maintainer, I want to declare that version
X of my package works with version Y of Squeak/Cuis/Pharo, so that
users of that Y can be reasonably confident that loading X into
Y will probably work.

Simple. That's all I want.

Please don't make me declare a bunch of different "releases" of X
to keep track of all the Y's.

Dave

David T. Lewis

Re: [Test][Squeak5.2rc1][SqueakMap] FFI entry in SqueakMap catalog for 5.2?

On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 11:19:57PM -0400, David T. Lewis wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 10:05:40PM +0200, H. Hirzel wrote:
> > Hi Chris
> >
> > On 10/12/18, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > Hi Hannes,
> > >
> > > I think you did not understand. Just because you "tested it and it
> > > worked" TODAY does not mean that script will continue working forever.
> >
> > There is no such claim. The claim is just that it still works for 5.2.
>
> +1
>
> >
> > > That's why we MUST NOT put a "Squeak 5.2" tag on it unless we make a
> > > separate Release with a script that uses explicitly-specified
> > > versions.
> >
> > > That's what we have now, I see no versions of "FFI" for 4.5, only
> > > (head), 3.10, and 3.9. The last two were published by Andreas.
> >
> > And that contains
> >
> > Installer new merge: #ffiTests'
> >
> > That means this script has been working since 3.9, i.e. for 10 years.
>
> +1
>
> We do need some way to deal with this use case.
>
> "Make another release of your package every time somebody in
> Squeak/Cuis/Pharo decides to announce a new release of their image"
> is not really a very good answer. It kind of works but ... yuk.
>
> In user story jargon:
>
> As an external package maintainer, I want to declare that version
> X of my package works with version Y of Squeak/Cuis/Pharo, so that
> users of that Y can be reasonably confident that loading X into
> Y will probably work.
>
> Simple. That's all I want.
>
> Please don't make me declare a bunch of different "releases" of X
> to keep track of all the Y's.
>

I have to apologize, I misread this thread, and what I said above is
nonsense with respect to the FFI package. Sorry for the distraction.

Chris is right that an explicitly-specified version is needed in this
case. The '(head)' release will continue to work as it has for many
years, but we need an explicitly-specified version in order to tag
something for Squeak 5.2.

Hannes is also right in terms of what he is trying to do - sometimes
you have a package that works, and you just want to say "it still works
for the new Squeak release". But in this case for FFI, the last
explicitly-specified release was the one for Squeak 3.10, and a lot
has changed since then. So I think we need to follow Chris' guidance
and make a new SqueakMap release for FFI with the configuration that
is currently known to work with Squeak 5.2.

To return to Hannes' original question (with my apologies once again
for having taking the discussion off track), what needs to be done?
We have existing FFI SqueakMap releases for '3.9', '3.10', and '(head)'.

It sounds like we need a new release called '5.2' with a load script
that looks similar to the load script for '3.10' but with package
versions that match what you get when you load '(head)'. That new
release should be tagged for Squeak5.2, and it should be "published"
from the http://map.squeak.org site. Does this sound right?

Dave

Chris Muller-4

Re: [Test][Squeak5.2rc1][SqueakMap] FFI entry in SqueakMap catalog for 5.2?

> It sounds like we need a new release called '5.2' with a load script
> that looks similar to the load script for '3.10' but with package
> versions that match what you get when you load '(head)'. That new
> release should be tagged for Squeak5.2, and it should be "published"
> from the http://map.squeak.org site. Does this sound right?

Yes, absolutely. And, once we have the template from this Squeak
release established, it becomes incredibly easy to simply do what you
said above, since you just select "Create New Release", and update
version numbers in the script to what they show in the Monticello
browser.

Any one of the 1.62 Magma packages can serve as the first template.
Just delete the pre-req load if you don't need it and change the
package names to the current correct versions of FFI.

- Chris

Hannes Hirzel

Re: [Test][Squeak5.2rc1][SqueakMap] FFI entry in SqueakMap catalog for 5.2?

Hello

Yes, in the meantime I have read through Chris Muller's email again
and I understand that

a) the entry with the head script which contains

Installer new merge: #ffiTests'

continues to be effective for future releases but will not help to document
what works here and now in 5.2.

b) for 5.2 we need to create specific new release.

It should be labeled '5.2' because that follows the example set in
the current FFI entry. (**)

And assign it to Squeak release 5.2 so that it shows up in the
filtered list of
'newly safely-available package' for 5.2

Then entry may follow the example of Magma database (e.g. 1.62
server) which is

'SMSqueakMap default loadUpdates.

(Smalltalk hasClassNamed: #MagmaSession)
ifFalse: [ SMSqueakMap default installPackageNamed: ''Magma''
version: ''1.62 client'' ].

#(''Magma-Server-cmm.515'' ''Magma-Tools-cmm.76'' ) do:
[ : each |
(Installer repository: ''http://www.squeaksource.com/Magma'') install: each ]'

The issue is to go for specifc version of FFI code

http://source.squeak.org/FFI/

The question now is which files to pick.

I probably just pick the latest ones. The 'versions' page show a
ConfigurationOfFFI-nice.41.mcz from Nicolas Cellier, April this year

But I remember that Eliot Miranda has added better VM support
for exceptions
regarding FFI, so I probably better go for his most recent

http://source.squeak.org/FFI/FFI-Kernel-eem.55.mcz

and for the Pool dictionary values
http://source.squeak.org/FFI/FFI-Pools-TorstenBergmann.4.mcz

And for the tests

FFI-Tests-cbc.9.mcz

I'll do that on Monday unless somebody else wants to do it.
The FFI package is 'community supported'. So anybody with which has a
SqueakMap login may create it.

Any comments?

--Hannes

** Other entries have different release numbering schemes, no need to
label releases in synch with the Squeak releases.

On 10/14/18, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:

>> It sounds like we need a new release called '5.2' with a load script
>> that looks similar to the load script for '3.10' but with package
>> versions that match what you get when you load '(head)'. That new
>> release should be tagged for Squeak5.2, and it should be "published"
>> from the http://map.squeak.org site. Does this sound right?
>
> Yes, absolutely. And, once we have the template from this Squeak
> release established, it becomes incredibly easy to simply do what you
> said above, since you just select "Create New Release", and update
> version numbers in the script to what they show in the Monticello
> browser.
>
> Any one of the 1.62 Magma packages can serve as the first template.
> Just delete the pre-req load if you don't need it and change the
> package names to the current correct versions of FFI.
>
> - Chris
>
>

David T. Lewis

Re: [Test][Squeak5.2rc1][SqueakMap] FFI entry in SqueakMap catalog for 5.2?

In reply to this post by Chris Muller-4

On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 06:40:03PM -0500, Chris Muller wrote:

> > It sounds like we need a new release called '5.2' with a load script
> > that looks similar to the load script for '3.10' but with package
> > versions that match what you get when you load '(head)'. That new
> > release should be tagged for Squeak5.2, and it should be "published"
> > from the http://map.squeak.org site. Does this sound right?
>
> Yes, absolutely. And, once we have the template from this Squeak
> release established, it becomes incredibly easy to simply do what you
> said above, since you just select "Create New Release", and update
> version numbers in the script to what they show in the Monticello
> browser.
>
> Any one of the 1.62 Magma packages can serve as the first template.
> Just delete the pre-req load if you don't need it and change the
> package names to the current correct versions of FFI.
>
> - Chris
>

OK, I just made a new '5.2' release in SqueakMap for FFI that loads
the three latest package versions, the same versions as when I load
'(head)' from SqueakMap.

I did not test and I cannot confirm it's right, but if '(head)' works
then I think this should be OK.

Hannes, can you please try updating your SqueakMap loader, then load
the '5.2' release for FFI?

If this looks good, we can go to the http://map.squeak.org page and
"publish" the new 5.2 release for FFI. That should make it loadable
at the package level from a SqueakMap Package Loader.

The load script that I added is:

#('FFI-Pools-TorstenBergmann.4' 'FFI-Kernel-eem.55' 'FFI-Tests-cbc.9') do:
[ :each |
(Installer repository: 'http://source.squeak.org/FFI') install: each ].

Dave

David T. Lewis

Re: [Test][Squeak5.2rc1][SqueakMap] FFI entry in SqueakMap catalog for 5.2?

In reply to this post by Hannes Hirzel

Hi Hannes,

This sounds right to me also. I just added a '5.2' SqueakMap release for
FFI that hopefully does what you explain here.

If it looks right, we can "publish" it from the web page to make it official.

Thank you for making this happen for FFI :-)

Dave

On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 02:30:35AM +0200, H. Hirzel wrote:

> Hello
>
> Yes, in the meantime I have read through Chris Muller's email again
> and I understand that
>
> a) the entry with the head script which contains
>
> Installer new merge: #ffiTests'
>
> continues to be effective for future releases but will not help to document
> what works here and now in 5.2.
>
>
> b) for 5.2 we need to create specific new release.
>
> It should be labeled '5.2' because that follows the example set in
> the current FFI entry. (**)
>
> And assign it to Squeak release 5.2 so that it shows up in the
> filtered list of
> 'newly safely-available package' for 5.2
>
> Then entry may follow the example of Magma database (e.g. 1.62
> server) which is
>
> 'SMSqueakMap default loadUpdates.
>
> (Smalltalk hasClassNamed: #MagmaSession)
> ifFalse: [ SMSqueakMap default installPackageNamed: ''Magma''
> version: ''1.62 client'' ].
>
> #(''Magma-Server-cmm.515'' ''Magma-Tools-cmm.76'' ) do:
> [ : each |
> (Installer repository: ''http://www.squeaksource.com/Magma'') install: each ]'
>
>
> The issue is to go for specifc version of FFI code
>
> http://source.squeak.org/FFI/
>
> The question now is which files to pick.
>
> I probably just pick the latest ones. The 'versions' page show a
> ConfigurationOfFFI-nice.41.mcz from Nicolas Cellier, April this year
>
> But I remember that Eliot Miranda has added better VM support
> for exceptions
> regarding FFI, so I probably better go for his most recent
>
> http://source.squeak.org/FFI/FFI-Kernel-eem.55.mcz
>
> and for the Pool dictionary values
> http://source.squeak.org/FFI/FFI-Pools-TorstenBergmann.4.mcz
>
> And for the tests
>
> FFI-Tests-cbc.9.mcz
>
> I'll do that on Monday unless somebody else wants to do it.
> The FFI package is 'community supported'. So anybody with which has a
> SqueakMap login may create it.
>
> Any comments?
>
> --Hannes
>
>
> ** Other entries have different release numbering schemes, no need to
> label releases in synch with the Squeak releases.
>
> On 10/14/18, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> It sounds like we need a new release called '5.2' with a load script
> >> that looks similar to the load script for '3.10' but with package
> >> versions that match what you get when you load '(head)'. That new
> >> release should be tagged for Squeak5.2, and it should be "published"
> >> from the http://map.squeak.org site. Does this sound right?
> >
> > Yes, absolutely. And, once we have the template from this Squeak
> > release established, it becomes incredibly easy to simply do what you
> > said above, since you just select "Create New Release", and update
> > version numbers in the script to what they show in the Monticello
> > browser.
> >
> > Any one of the 1.62 Magma packages can serve as the first template.
> > Just delete the pre-req load if you don't need it and change the
> > package names to the current correct versions of FFI.
> >
> > - Chris
> >
> >

Hannes Hirzel

Re: [Test][Squeak5.2rc1][SqueakMap] FFI entry in SqueakMap catalog for 5.2?

Hi David

Thank you for the FFI (5.2) entry (release) entry you created. If I
click on it and 'Install' it it loads fine.

On the other side if I click on FFI and then Install it gives a small
dialog box with

'The package has no published release for your Squeak version'.

For example the recently created SIXX entry by Masashi Umezawa does
not have this dialog box.

This box will probably not show up if you "publish" is from the web page.

--Hannes

On 10/14/18, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Hannes,
>
> This sounds right to me also. I just added a '5.2' SqueakMap release for
> FFI that hopefully does what you explain here.
>
> If it looks right, we can "publish" it from the web page to make it
> official.
>
> Thank you for making this happen for FFI :-)
>
> Dave
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 02:30:35AM +0200, H. Hirzel wrote:
>> Hello
>>
>> Yes, in the meantime I have read through Chris Muller's email again
>> and I understand that
>>
>> a) the entry with the head script which contains
>>
>> Installer new merge: #ffiTests'
>>
>> continues to be effective for future releases but will not help to
>> document
>> what works here and now in 5.2.
>>
>>
>> b) for 5.2 we need to create specific new release.
>>
>> It should be labeled '5.2' because that follows the example set in
>> the current FFI entry. (**)
>>
>> And assign it to Squeak release 5.2 so that it shows up in the
>> filtered list of
>> 'newly safely-available package' for 5.2
>>
>> Then entry may follow the example of Magma database (e.g. 1.62
>> server) which is
>>
>> 'SMSqueakMap default loadUpdates.
>>
>> (Smalltalk hasClassNamed: #MagmaSession)
>> ifFalse: [ SMSqueakMap default installPackageNamed: ''Magma''
>> version: ''1.62 client'' ].
>>
>> #(''Magma-Server-cmm.515'' ''Magma-Tools-cmm.76'' ) do:
>> [ : each |
>> (Installer repository: ''http://www.squeaksource.com/Magma'') install:
>> each ]'
>>
>>
>> The issue is to go for specifc version of FFI code
>>
>> http://source.squeak.org/FFI/
>>
>> The question now is which files to pick.
>>
>> I probably just pick the latest ones. The 'versions' page show a
>> ConfigurationOfFFI-nice.41.mcz from Nicolas Cellier, April this
>> year
>>
>> But I remember that Eliot Miranda has added better VM support
>> for exceptions
>> regarding FFI, so I probably better go for his most recent
>>
>> http://source.squeak.org/FFI/FFI-Kernel-eem.55.mcz
>>
>> and for the Pool dictionary values
>> http://source.squeak.org/FFI/FFI-Pools-TorstenBergmann.4.mcz
>>
>> And for the tests
>>
>> FFI-Tests-cbc.9.mcz
>>
>> I'll do that on Monday unless somebody else wants to do it.
>> The FFI package is 'community supported'. So anybody with which
>> has a
>> SqueakMap login may create it.
>>
>> Any comments?
>>
>> --Hannes
>>
>>
>> ** Other entries have different release numbering schemes, no need to
>> label releases in synch with the Squeak releases.
>>
>> On 10/14/18, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >> It sounds like we need a new release called '5.2' with a load script
>> >> that looks similar to the load script for '3.10' but with package
>> >> versions that match what you get when you load '(head)'. That new
>> >> release should be tagged for Squeak5.2, and it should be "published"
>> >> from the http://map.squeak.org site. Does this sound right?
>> >
>> > Yes, absolutely. And, once we have the template from this Squeak
>> > release established, it becomes incredibly easy to simply do what you
>> > said above, since you just select "Create New Release", and update
>> > version numbers in the script to what they show in the Monticello
>> > browser.
>> >
>> > Any one of the 1.62 Magma packages can serve as the first template.
>> > Just delete the pre-req load if you don't need it and change the
>> > package names to the current correct versions of FFI.
>> >
>> > - Chris
>> >
>> >
>

David T. Lewis

Re: [Test][Squeak5.2rc1][SqueakMap] FFI entry in SqueakMap catalog for 5.2?

Hi Hannes,

Unfortunately I cannot find a way to do the publish. The map.squeak.org
site lets me edit my own package releases, and that is where the "publish"
check box is. But I see no way for me to do it with the community supported
FFI package.

Meanwhile, if I try doing the install for FFI from the package level,
then click "accept" to proceed, it tries to load the old 3.10 version.
So that is not good :-(

Dave

On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 03:36:04AM +0200, H. Hirzel wrote:

> Hi David
>
> Thank you for the FFI (5.2) entry (release) entry you created. If I
> click on it and 'Install' it it loads fine.
>
> On the other side if I click on FFI and then Install it gives a small
> dialog box with
>
> 'The package has no published release for your Squeak version'.
>
> For example the recently created SIXX entry by Masashi Umezawa does
> not have this dialog box.
>
> This box will probably not show up if you "publish" is from the web page.
>
> --Hannes
>
> On 10/14/18, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Hi Hannes,
> >
> > This sounds right to me also. I just added a '5.2' SqueakMap release for
> > FFI that hopefully does what you explain here.
> >
> > If it looks right, we can "publish" it from the web page to make it
> > official.
> >
> > Thank you for making this happen for FFI :-)
> >
> > Dave
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 02:30:35AM +0200, H. Hirzel wrote:
> >> Hello
> >>
> >> Yes, in the meantime I have read through Chris Muller's email again
> >> and I understand that
> >>
> >> a) the entry with the head script which contains
> >>
> >> Installer new merge: #ffiTests'
> >>
> >> continues to be effective for future releases but will not help to
> >> document
> >> what works here and now in 5.2.
> >>
> >>
> >> b) for 5.2 we need to create specific new release.
> >>
> >> It should be labeled '5.2' because that follows the example set in
> >> the current FFI entry. (**)
> >>
> >> And assign it to Squeak release 5.2 so that it shows up in the
> >> filtered list of
> >> 'newly safely-available package' for 5.2
> >>
> >> Then entry may follow the example of Magma database (e.g. 1.62
> >> server) which is
> >>
> >> 'SMSqueakMap default loadUpdates.
> >>
> >> (Smalltalk hasClassNamed: #MagmaSession)
> >> ifFalse: [ SMSqueakMap default installPackageNamed: ''Magma''
> >> version: ''1.62 client'' ].
> >>
> >> #(''Magma-Server-cmm.515'' ''Magma-Tools-cmm.76'' ) do:
> >> [ : each |
> >> (Installer repository: ''http://www.squeaksource.com/Magma'') install:
> >> each ]'
> >>
> >>
> >> The issue is to go for specifc version of FFI code
> >>
> >> http://source.squeak.org/FFI/
> >>
> >> The question now is which files to pick.
> >>
> >> I probably just pick the latest ones. The 'versions' page show a
> >> ConfigurationOfFFI-nice.41.mcz from Nicolas Cellier, April this
> >> year
> >>
> >> But I remember that Eliot Miranda has added better VM support
> >> for exceptions
> >> regarding FFI, so I probably better go for his most recent
> >>
> >> http://source.squeak.org/FFI/FFI-Kernel-eem.55.mcz
> >>
> >> and for the Pool dictionary values
> >> http://source.squeak.org/FFI/FFI-Pools-TorstenBergmann.4.mcz
> >>
> >> And for the tests
> >>
> >> FFI-Tests-cbc.9.mcz
> >>
> >> I'll do that on Monday unless somebody else wants to do it.
> >> The FFI package is 'community supported'. So anybody with which
> >> has a
> >> SqueakMap login may create it.
> >>
> >> Any comments?
> >>
> >> --Hannes
> >>
> >>
> >> ** Other entries have different release numbering schemes, no need to
> >> label releases in synch with the Squeak releases.
> >>
> >> On 10/14/18, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> >> It sounds like we need a new release called '5.2' with a load script
> >> >> that looks similar to the load script for '3.10' but with package
> >> >> versions that match what you get when you load '(head)'. That new
> >> >> release should be tagged for Squeak5.2, and it should be "published"
> >> >> from the http://map.squeak.org site. Does this sound right?
> >> >
> >> > Yes, absolutely. And, once we have the template from this Squeak
> >> > release established, it becomes incredibly easy to simply do what you
> >> > said above, since you just select "Create New Release", and update
> >> > version numbers in the script to what they show in the Monticello
> >> > browser.
> >> >
> >> > Any one of the 1.62 Magma packages can serve as the first template.
> >> > Just delete the pre-req load if you don't need it and change the
> >> > package names to the current correct versions of FFI.
> >> >
> >> > - Chris
> >> >
> >> >
> >
>

David T. Lewis

Re: [Test][Squeak5.2rc1][SqueakMap] FFI entry in SqueakMap catalog for 5.2?

The SqueakMap package loader looks for the 'publisher' field to
decide if a package release has been published, as opposed to
just tagged for Squeak5.2 but not published. If that field is nil,
it finds some other published release (even it if is not tagged
for Squeak5.2) and loads that one instead.

I tried to hack the 'publisher' field from the image side and save
it back to the server, but the SqueakMap server was too smart for
me, and would not keep my change to the publisher field.

For the record, here is what I did (that does not work):

thePackageRelease := (SMPackageRelease allInstances
select: [:e | e package name = 'FFI'
and: [e version = '5.2']]) first.
myAccount := (SMAccount allInstances
select: [:e | e name = 'Dave Lewis']) first.
thePackageRelease publisher: myAccount.

Maybe there is a SqueakMap administrator function that would allow
this release to be published?

Dave

On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 09:32:53AM -0400, David T. Lewis wrote:

> Hi Hannes,
>
> Unfortunately I cannot find a way to do the publish. The map.squeak.org
> site lets me edit my own package releases, and that is where the "publish"
> check box is. But I see no way for me to do it with the community supported
> FFI package.
>
> Meanwhile, if I try doing the install for FFI from the package level,
> then click "accept" to proceed, it tries to load the old 3.10 version.
> So that is not good :-(
>
> Dave
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 03:36:04AM +0200, H. Hirzel wrote:
> > Hi David
> >
> > Thank you for the FFI (5.2) entry (release) entry you created. If I
> > click on it and 'Install' it it loads fine.
> >
> > On the other side if I click on FFI and then Install it gives a small
> > dialog box with
> >
> > 'The package has no published release for your Squeak version'.
> >
> > For example the recently created SIXX entry by Masashi Umezawa does
> > not have this dialog box.
> >
> > This box will probably not show up if you "publish" is from the web page.
> >
> > --Hannes
> >
> > On 10/14/18, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > Hi Hannes,
> > >
> > > This sounds right to me also. I just added a '5.2' SqueakMap release for
> > > FFI that hopefully does what you explain here.
> > >
> > > If it looks right, we can "publish" it from the web page to make it
> > > official.
> > >
> > > Thank you for making this happen for FFI :-)
> > >
> > > Dave
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 02:30:35AM +0200, H. Hirzel wrote:
> > >> Hello
> > >>
> > >> Yes, in the meantime I have read through Chris Muller's email again
> > >> and I understand that
> > >>
> > >> a) the entry with the head script which contains
> > >>
> > >> Installer new merge: #ffiTests'
> > >>
> > >> continues to be effective for future releases but will not help to
> > >> document
> > >> what works here and now in 5.2.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> b) for 5.2 we need to create specific new release.
> > >>
> > >> It should be labeled '5.2' because that follows the example set in
> > >> the current FFI entry. (**)
> > >>
> > >> And assign it to Squeak release 5.2 so that it shows up in the
> > >> filtered list of
> > >> 'newly safely-available package' for 5.2
> > >>
> > >> Then entry may follow the example of Magma database (e.g. 1.62
> > >> server) which is
> > >>
> > >> 'SMSqueakMap default loadUpdates.
> > >>
> > >> (Smalltalk hasClassNamed: #MagmaSession)
> > >> ifFalse: [ SMSqueakMap default installPackageNamed: ''Magma''
> > >> version: ''1.62 client'' ].
> > >>
> > >> #(''Magma-Server-cmm.515'' ''Magma-Tools-cmm.76'' ) do:
> > >> [ : each |
> > >> (Installer repository: ''http://www.squeaksource.com/Magma'') install:
> > >> each ]'
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> The issue is to go for specifc version of FFI code
> > >>
> > >> http://source.squeak.org/FFI/
> > >>
> > >> The question now is which files to pick.
> > >>
> > >> I probably just pick the latest ones. The 'versions' page show a
> > >> ConfigurationOfFFI-nice.41.mcz from Nicolas Cellier, April this
> > >> year
> > >>
> > >> But I remember that Eliot Miranda has added better VM support
> > >> for exceptions
> > >> regarding FFI, so I probably better go for his most recent
> > >>
> > >> http://source.squeak.org/FFI/FFI-Kernel-eem.55.mcz
> > >>
> > >> and for the Pool dictionary values
> > >> http://source.squeak.org/FFI/FFI-Pools-TorstenBergmann.4.mcz
> > >>
> > >> And for the tests
> > >>
> > >> FFI-Tests-cbc.9.mcz
> > >>
> > >> I'll do that on Monday unless somebody else wants to do it.
> > >> The FFI package is 'community supported'. So anybody with which
> > >> has a
> > >> SqueakMap login may create it.
> > >>
> > >> Any comments?
> > >>
> > >> --Hannes
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ** Other entries have different release numbering schemes, no need to
> > >> label releases in synch with the Squeak releases.
> > >>
> > >> On 10/14/18, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >> >> It sounds like we need a new release called '5.2' with a load script
> > >> >> that looks similar to the load script for '3.10' but with package
> > >> >> versions that match what you get when you load '(head)'. That new
> > >> >> release should be tagged for Squeak5.2, and it should be "published"
> > >> >> from the http://map.squeak.org site. Does this sound right?
> > >> >
> > >> > Yes, absolutely. And, once we have the template from this Squeak
> > >> > release established, it becomes incredibly easy to simply do what you
> > >> > said above, since you just select "Create New Release", and update
> > >> > version numbers in the script to what they show in the Monticello
> > >> > browser.
> > >> >
> > >> > Any one of the 1.62 Magma packages can serve as the first template.
> > >> > Just delete the pre-req load if you don't need it and change the
> > >> > package names to the current correct versions of FFI.
> > >> >
> > >> > - Chris
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >
> >
>

Hannes Hirzel

Re: [Test][Squeak5.2rc1][SqueakMap] FFI entry in SqueakMap catalog for 5.2?

Hi David

Thanks for taking the time to come up with the manual patch script to
set yourself as publisher for the FFI release 5.2 on SqueakMap. It is
useful, see below.

On 10/14/18, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote:

> The SqueakMap package loader looks for the 'publisher' field to
> decide if a package release has been published, as opposed to
> just tagged for Squeak5.2 but not published. If that field is nil,
> it finds some other published release (even it if is not tagged
> for Squeak5.2) and loads that one instead.
>
> I tried to hack the 'publisher' field from the image side and save
> it back to the server, but the SqueakMap server was too smart for
> me, and would not keep my change to the publisher field.
>
> For the record, here is what I did (that does not work):
>
> thePackageRelease := (SMPackageRelease allInstances
> select: [:e | e package name = 'FFI'
> and: [e version = '5.2']]) first.
> myAccount := (SMAccount allInstances
> select: [:e | e name = 'Dave Lewis']) first.
> thePackageRelease publisher: myAccount.
>
> Maybe there is a SqueakMap administrator function that would allow
> this release to be published?

Yes, there is.
I ran it on the server in the 'do-it-window' (see attachment).

It seems to solve the issue. Could you please check ('Update your
SqueakMap client object net and install with click on 'FFI' only).

This really seems to be a 'community support' case :-)

--Hannes

> Dave
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 09:32:53AM -0400, David T. Lewis wrote:
>> Hi Hannes,
>>
>> Unfortunately I cannot find a way to do the publish. The map.squeak.org
>> site lets me edit my own package releases, and that is where the "publish"
>> check box is. But I see no way for me to do it with the community
>> supported
>> FFI package.
>>
>> Meanwhile, if I try doing the install for FFI from the package level,
>> then click "accept" to proceed, it tries to load the old 3.10 version.
>> So that is not good :-(
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 03:36:04AM +0200, H. Hirzel wrote:
>> > Hi David
>> >
>> > Thank you for the FFI (5.2) entry (release) entry you created. If I
>> > click on it and 'Install' it it loads fine.
>> >
>> > On the other side if I click on FFI and then Install it gives a small
>> > dialog box with
>> >
>> > 'The package has no published release for your Squeak version'.
>> >
>> > For example the recently created SIXX entry by Masashi Umezawa does
>> > not have this dialog box.
>> >
>> > This box will probably not show up if you "publish" is from the web
>> > page.
>> >
>> > --Hannes
>> >
>> > On 10/14/18, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > > Hi Hannes,
>> > >
>> > > This sounds right to me also. I just added a '5.2' SqueakMap release
>> > > for
>> > > FFI that hopefully does what you explain here.
>> > >
>> > > If it looks right, we can "publish" it from the web page to make it
>> > > official.
>> > >
>> > > Thank you for making this happen for FFI :-)
>> > >
>> > > Dave
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 02:30:35AM +0200, H. Hirzel wrote:
>> > >> Hello
>> > >>
>> > >> Yes, in the meantime I have read through Chris Muller's email again
>> > >> and I understand that
>> > >>
>> > >> a) the entry with the head script which contains
>> > >>
>> > >> Installer new merge: #ffiTests'
>> > >>
>> > >> continues to be effective for future releases but will not help
>> > >> to
>> > >> document
>> > >> what works here and now in 5.2.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> b) for 5.2 we need to create specific new release.
>> > >>
>> > >> It should be labeled '5.2' because that follows the example set
>> > >> in
>> > >> the current FFI entry. (**)
>> > >>
>> > >> And assign it to Squeak release 5.2 so that it shows up in the
>> > >> filtered list of
>> > >> 'newly safely-available package' for 5.2
>> > >>
>> > >> Then entry may follow the example of Magma database (e.g. 1.62
>> > >> server) which is
>> > >>
>> > >> 'SMSqueakMap default loadUpdates.
>> > >>
>> > >> (Smalltalk hasClassNamed: #MagmaSession)
>> > >> ifFalse: [ SMSqueakMap default installPackageNamed: ''Magma''
>> > >> version: ''1.62 client'' ].
>> > >>
>> > >> #(''Magma-Server-cmm.515'' ''Magma-Tools-cmm.76'' ) do:
>> > >> [ : each |
>> > >> (Installer repository: ''http://www.squeaksource.com/Magma'')
>> > >> install:
>> > >> each ]'
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> The issue is to go for specifc version of FFI code
>> > >>
>> > >> http://source.squeak.org/FFI/
>> > >>
>> > >> The question now is which files to pick.
>> > >>
>> > >> I probably just pick the latest ones. The 'versions' page
>> > >> show a
>> > >> ConfigurationOfFFI-nice.41.mcz from Nicolas Cellier, April
>> > >> this
>> > >> year
>> > >>
>> > >> But I remember that Eliot Miranda has added better VM support
>> > >> for exceptions
>> > >> regarding FFI, so I probably better go for his most recent
>> > >>
>> > >> http://source.squeak.org/FFI/FFI-Kernel-eem.55.mcz
>> > >>
>> > >> and for the Pool dictionary values
>> > >> http://source.squeak.org/FFI/FFI-Pools-TorstenBergmann.4.mcz
>> > >>
>> > >> And for the tests
>> > >>
>> > >> FFI-Tests-cbc.9.mcz
>> > >>
>> > >> I'll do that on Monday unless somebody else wants to do it.
>> > >> The FFI package is 'community supported'. So anybody with
>> > >> which
>> > >> has a
>> > >> SqueakMap login may create it.
>> > >>
>> > >> Any comments?
>> > >>
>> > >> --Hannes
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> ** Other entries have different release numbering schemes, no need to
>> > >> label releases in synch with the Squeak releases.
>> > >>
>> > >> On 10/14/18, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > >> >> It sounds like we need a new release called '5.2' with a load
>> > >> >> script
>> > >> >> that looks similar to the load script for '3.10' but with package
>> > >> >> versions that match what you get when you load '(head)'. That new
>> > >> >> release should be tagged for Squeak5.2, and it should be
>> > >> >> "published"
>> > >> >> from the http://map.squeak.org site. Does this sound right?
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Yes, absolutely. And, once we have the template from this Squeak
>> > >> > release established, it becomes incredibly easy to simply do what
>> > >> > you
>> > >> > said above, since you just select "Create New Release", and update
>> > >> > version numbers in the script to what they show in the Monticello
>> > >> > browser.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Any one of the 1.62 Magma packages can serve as the first template.
>> > >> > Just delete the pre-req load if you don't need it and change the
>> > >> > package names to the current correct versions of FFI.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > - Chris
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>

Set_DaveLewis_as_SMap_Publisher_of_FFI_release_Screenshot_2018-10-14.png (42K) Download Attachment

cbc

Re: [Test][Squeak5.2rc1][SqueakMap] FFI entry in SqueakMap catalog for 5.2?

On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 9:17 AM H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote

It seems to solve the issue. Could you please check ('Update your
SqueakMap client object net and install with click on 'FFI' only).

This worked for me. However, I did notice that there is now no (head) release - that seems to have gone away.

-cbc

David T. Lewis

Re: [Test][Squeak5.2rc1][SqueakMap] FFI entry in SqueakMap catalog for 5.2?

On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 10:36:15AM -0700, Chris Cunningham wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 9:17 AM H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote
>
> >
> > It seems to solve the issue. Could you please check ('Update your
> > SqueakMap client object net and install with click on 'FFI' only).
> >
>
> This worked for me. However, I did notice that there is now no (head)
> release - that seems to have gone away.
>

Ugh. I must have somehow clobbered the (head) release when I made the
new '5.2' release. I really don't know how I did that, but I can see
that the id of the current '5.2' release is the same as that of the
original (head).

I'm not sure how to preceed, maybe just make a new (head) entry?

Dave

Squeak - Dev mailing list

Squeak 5.2

In reply to this post by David T. Lewis

Just ran all tests in TestRunner on Windows 10 (version 10.0.17134.345) for both 32 bit & 64 bit versions of Squeak. You'll find, attached, screenshots of both TestRunner results.

I unzipped the files and ran all tests "out of the box" right away.

Hope this helps.

-----------------
Benoît St-Jean
Yahoo! Messenger: bstjean
Twitter: @BenLeChialeux
Pinterest: benoitstjean
Instagram: Chef_Benito
IRC: lamneth
Blogue: endormitoire.wordpress.com
"A standpoint is an intellectual horizon of radius zero". (A. Einstein)

TestRunner Squeak 5.2 64 bit.JPG (230K) Download Attachment

TestRunnerSqueak 5.2 32bit.JPG (199K) Download Attachment

Squeak - Dev mailing list

Squeak 5.2 batch file

In reply to this post by Hannes Hirzel

We should modify the batch files on windows (32 & 64 bit versions of Squeak) to avoid starting Squeak with a useless and annoying CMD window that stays opened in the background.

The batch file should be like:

START /B .\Squeak5.2-18221-32bit-All-in-One.app\Contents\Win32\Squeak.exe "Squeak5.2-18221-32bit-All-in-One.app\Contents\Resources\Squeak5.2-18221-32bit.image"

fniephaus

Re: Squeak 5.2 batch file

On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 5:29 PM Benoit St-Jean via Squeak-dev <[hidden email]> wrote:

We should modify the batch files on windows (32 & 64 bit versions of Squeak) to avoid starting Squeak with a useless and annoying CMD window that stays opened in the background.

The batch file should be like:

START /B .\Squeak5.2-18221-32bit-All-in-One.app\Contents\Win32\Squeak.exe "Squeak5.2-18221-32bit-All-in-One.app\Contents\Resources\Squeak5.2-18221-32bit.image"

Sounds reasonable, but I'm no Windows user. So someone should verify this works.

Nonetheless, all templates used for our bundles can be found at:

https://github.com/squeak-smalltalk/squeak-app/blob/squeak-trunk/templates/

You probably want to open a pull request against:

https://github.com/squeak-smalltalk/squeak-app/blob/squeak-trunk/templates/all-in-one/squeak.bat

Best,

Fabio

-----------------
Benoît St-Jean
Yahoo! Messenger: bstjean
Twitter: @BenLeChialeux
Pinterest: benoitstjean
Instagram: Chef_Benito
IRC: lamneth
Blogue: endormitoire.wordpress.com
"A standpoint is an intellectual horizon of radius zero". (A. Einstein)