Hi,
	According to Apple's website, the following docs cover this idea
for MacOS9 and MacOSX.

overview http://developer.apple.com/technotes/tn/tn2003.html
macos9 http://developer.apple.com/technotes/tn/tn1188.html
macosX
http://developer.apple.com/techpubs/macosx/CoreFoundation/BundleServices/Bundle_Services/index.html
http://gemma.apple.com/techpubs/macosx/Essentials/SystemOverview/Bundles/iBundles.html

Off the top of my head one might be able to do this by hand
and not require any VM changes.

Cheers

bruce



Tim Rowledge <tim at sumeru.stanford.edu> wrote:
> > "Patrick Castle" <lemeia at bigpond.com> wrote:
> > > There is something I don't understand however.
> > > 
> > > If it is true that you can't deploy your projects as .exe files I'm not sure
> > > I understand what the point is of working so hard to evolve a development
> > > like Squeak. I'm sorry if that sounds like the dumbest question anyone could
> It's a long time since any major application was delivered as a single
> executable. Consider M$ Word; dozens or maybe hundreds of files. I
> haven't had to use windows in about 5 years, so I must be out of date,
> but doesn't word now occupy >50Mb of disc? How many files?
> 
> Depending somewhat on the platform it is easy to distibute applications
> based on a system such as Squeak. On my Acorn machine, it is simply a
> directory with a name starting with '!' which contains any libraries,
> executabel(s) data files, icon files, resources, manuals etc. I think
> Mac OS X has a similar concept. On windows I'm sure you can bind the
> image & resources into the executable somehow, etc etc.
> 
> tim
> 
> -- 
> Tim Rowledge, tim at sumeru.stanford.edu, http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim
> Useful random insult:- Put a lens in each ear and you've got a telescope.