3.8 full image on ftp.squeak.org with proxy

Bruce O'Neel edoneel at sdf.lonestar.org
Mon Aug 1 09:18:57 UTC 2005


Sorry for the delay.  I've already updated ftp.squeak.org, and,
finally, managed to update st.cs.uiuc.edu.  There is something very
odd about the disk there.

The only package which needs special care is the Mac one.  Since we
use a disk image (.dmg) file, I think, that only the mac can generate

The .zip files for windows I have, for years, built on unix or linux
systems.  The unix/linux .tar files are also built on unix systems.  I
am happy to do this, I just got overloaded and it is taking me now
more than a week to go through the "important" email that collected.



On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 12:04:41AM -0400, Doug Way wrote:
> On Jul 28, 2005, at 2:18 AM, Marcus Denker wrote:
> >Questions: How do we make these files appear on the sqf server?
> >                     Who can rebuild a windows package of full?
> Looks like Bruce just fixed these... I verified myself.
> As to Bruce's "meta problem" of not having a backup person to handle 
> uploading important items when Bruce is away... perhaps the box-admins 
> could be backups?  (Which I think are Cees, Ken and possibly Goran.)  I 
> assume the ftp.squeak.org machine is a "box" they have access to. :)
> (In this case it was a little trickier because we also needed someone 
> to build the windows package, and it's possible that none of the box 
> admins are Windows squeakers... so it probably didn't get done because 
> it wasn't easy for one person to do it all.)
> >And then there is the 3.8.1 question: there are lots of things (e.g.
> >0001532: Remove some VMMaker methods to package)
> >that I would like to have in 3.8 if I would continue to use it. Which 
> >I will not,
> >I will move on to 3.9 next week.
> >
> >The question is now how to handle 3.8 vs. 3.9? The best would be to
> >have a mantis like system that would funnel all approved items for
> >3.9a to the maintainer of 3.8 for possible inclusion. We do not have
> >this system, and I am reluctant to let all the reports open on mantis
> >because they might be added to 3.8 or maybe not. So I think I will
> >close all items on mantis that are in 3.9, everything else would get
> >unmanagable, I think. (there is already too much stuff there).
> Good question... I guess it's really up to Michael & whoever wants to 
> be in charge of 3.8, which fixes should be added to 3.8.
> I'd guess the number of items added to 3.8.1+ is pretty small compared 
> with 3.9, it wouldn't make sense to keep the mantis items open just 
> because they're not in 3.8 (but are in 3.9).
> - Doug

edoneel at sdf.lonestar.org
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org

More information about the Box-admins mailing list