William O. Dargel said: 
> Jecel Mattos de Assumpcao Jr. wrote:
> 
> > I really liked the auto update feature and have tested
> > it twice so far. When a communication problem happens,
> > however, the system gives up and goes on to the next
> > update. When they are all in it is no use to ask to
> > update again from the help menu since you will just
> > be informed that there are no more updates (you already
> > have the last one). My Squeak image is now missing
> > three patches so far.
> 
> Dan gave some ideas as to how to recover the missing files once you are
> in this predicament.
> 
> My thought is to change the Utilities class absorbUpdatesFromServer
> method to not put you into this state in the first place. The attached
> version of the method will stop loading updates after the first failure,
> and report how many were loaded, how many weren't and the url of the
> first one that didn't load. In your situation (having started from a
> clean image) after a failure, you could then retry the updates and have
> it pick back up from where it left off.
> 
> Probably even better would be to have both types of behavior selectable
> in some way. But I'll leave that as an exercise for someone else. :-)
> 

I've not yet upgraded to 2.0, but I presume an update leaves a mark in the
image -- "LatestUpdate" or some such, so that when you go to load more
updates, it knows where to start.  If one were to assure that that value
was not updated until the update was successfully completed, then when a
new update started it could check that value and detect the break in the
sequence and present the user with a choice, "load anyway, or abort?"

Updating the image in LispWorks did something like that on a recent project
I was involved in.

joe