I'm about ready to start working on my first "real" Squeak projects and
I'm looking for a stable base from which to start.  I've been playing
with 3.3 and things have been a bit sluggish for me and so I decided to
step back to 3.2 for these projects.  I downloaded

http://wuarchive.wustl.edu/languages/smalltalk/Smalltalk/Squeak/3.2gamma/Squeak3.2gamma-4743.zip

and have had one or two problems with this image.

First, I'm using Debian Unstable and I've tried both a shasnap
downloaded in early February that I built myself as well as Lex's

ftp://st.cs.uiuc.edu/pub/Smalltalk/Squeak/3.2gamma/unix/debian/squeak-vm-oss_3.2.4653-1_i386.deb

and both seem to exhibit the same behaviour.

The primary problem is with resizing the world.  First of all, screen
redraw seems to be very slow and "uncertain", this is even noticeable on
a ~1.5GHZ system.  More importantly, resizing very often leads to a
crash:

Segmentation fault

1097072640 DisplayScreen>forceToScreen:
1097072548 [] in DisplayScreen>forceDamageToScreen:
1097072088 OrderedCollection>do:
1097071968 DisplayScreen>forceDamageToScreen:
1097071876 WorldState>forceDamageToScreen:
1097057428 WorldState>displayWorld:submorphs:
1097057336 PasteUpMorph>privateOuterDisplayWorld
1097057244 PasteUpMorph>displayWorld
1097057520 [] in WorldState>displayWorldSafely:
1097057152 BlockContext>on:do:
1097057060 BlockContext>ifError:
1097056968 WorldState>displayWorldSafely:
1097056748 WorldState>doOneCycleNowFor:
1095161652 WorldState>doOneCycleFor:
1095161560 PasteUpMorph>doOneCycle
1089781292 [] in Project class>spawnNewProcess
1089781476 [] in BlockContext>newProcess

[1]+  Exit 255                squeak siteadmin

Also, I'm not sure that 'load code updates' is doing the right thing in
this image.  My first thought of course was that since I had seen some
discussion on the list about this in the past, that there must be a code
update to fix it, but when I attempt to get updates it finds nothing.  I
have to wonder though if it should really be looking in

squeak.cs.uiuc.edu/Squeak/2.0/

Is this correct?

Thanks,

Ken Causey