Hi Marcel,

On 3/11/22 08:19, Marcel Taeumel wrote:
> Considering the patch you proposed via PackageInfo-Base-lrnp.76, I think that you package organizer contains an invalid package 'nil'.
> 
> Would you check that via "PackageOrganizer default packages"?
> Can you remember how you got into that state?
> 
> It's unusual that the package organizer has a 'nil' package in its registry. Therefore, I would rather not start to patch the system with such extra "ifNil"-checks.
I checked a fresh trunk image, no nils in the package organizer.

I was looking at the debugger for it again and noticed PackageInfo
handles the nil system category as never yourself... it's the subclass
MCMockPackageInfo that doesn't do the nil check.

That discovered, I still think putting a short circuit return in
PackageOrganizer makes sense.  If nil means 'not me', why spend time
enumerating?