Hi Göran,

> Wow! I have never seen anything like this in Squeak before. Very
> impressive!

Yes, it is impressive also for us :-)
The FractalPlants image (124k) is the bigger image we have created.
Images normally takes 64-100kb but do very little things...

> A humble little question: Is there any chance your work would result in
> some little tool for creating such small images? Under Squeak-L?

If it is really needed we can ask for a permition to made
 it under Squeak-L.

> Hehe. Now if we could get a nice binding with a good crossplatform UI
> toolkit (Gtk or wxWindows etc) and a superfast Jitter from Ian and/or
> Marcus then Squeak would become REALLY attractive to a lot of
> developers. ;-)

Out images can determine the minimum requirements for the VM...
They can also be used to build the minimum VM that can run them.

regards,
Ale.

----- Original Message -----
From: <goran.hultgren at bluefish.se>
To: "The general-purpose Squeak developers list"
<squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 5:43 AM
Subject: Re: Mythical small kernel images?


> "Alejandro F. Reimondo" <aleReimondo at smalltalking.net> wrote:
> > You can also build images with even smaller footprint
> >  using and alternative like the SystemTracer.
> > Here I attach two images in binary format that
> >  can work on win* machines (use FFI during runtime)
> >  one of  62kb and the other of 120kb
> > They are runtime only, like java programs...
> > Ale.
>
> Wow! I have never seen anything like this in Squeak before. Very
> impressive!
>
> A humble little question: Is there any chance your work would result in
> some little tool for creating such small images? Under Squeak-L?
>
> Hehe. Now if we could get a nice binding with a good crossplatform UI
> toolkit (Gtk or wxWindows etc) and a superfast Jitter from Ian and/or
> Marcus then Squeak would become REALLY attractive to a lot of
> developers. ;-)
>
> regards, Göran
>
> PS. Marcus - how is it going with your project? Just curious. :-)
>
>