Maybe you could try the other way around, roll back Morphic-fbs.663 from
update-fbs.239, and introduce it in a later update AFTER Kernel-fbs.791.
Not sure if possible, because moving elements between package necessarily
create intricated changes, but worth trying...

Otherwise, we could have to backport the Environment change to an older
Kernel version, and iteratively on any intermediate Kernel version
necessary to the update chain.



2013/7/18 Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com>

> On 17 July 2013 23:00, tim Rowledge <tim at rowledge.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 17-07-2013, at 2:15 PM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> So I had expected that this would be sufficient to fix the update
> >> stream. It's not. I issued a new config map specifying this version,
> >> and it loads Kernel before Morphic (the problem package), and as far
> >> as I can see we still have update stream problems. Someone help,
> >> please?
> >
> > Wish I could - but it puzzles me, too. We may have to wait until Colin
> is available again
>
> I'm taking the image that's in the squeak-ci repository and updating
> it. That's not _terribly_ old. Maybe a few weeks out of date. (I could
> go check, but it's all the way in the other tab...)
>
> The problem arises when loading Morphic-fbs.663 from update-fbs.239.
> At this point you get a walkback because Kernel-fbs.791 isn't loaded.
> This contains the bugfix that lets you load a class with a nil
> Environment, but of course it also includes all the changes between
> Kernel-fbs.779 and -791. By the time you've started loading
> Morphic-fbs.663 it's too late to try load Kernel-fbs.791. But you also
> can't just load Kernel-fbs.791 before you start the update, because
> the image hangs doing _something_, presumably because the other stuff
> in the diff between Kernel-fbs.779 Kernel-fbs.791 requires other
> packages to be loaded.
>
> So what's next? One hack might be to quietly reissue update-fbs.239,
> but (a) that's disgusting and (b) I'd always understood config maps to
> be immutable and (c) it sounds like a recipe for disaster.
>
> I don't think I need an Environments expert, but I do need a
> Monticello expert. Takers? Volunteers?
>
> frank
>
> > tim
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20130718/912066a3/attachment.htm