<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 8:21 AM, Andreas Raab <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:andreas.raab@gmx.de">andreas.raab@gmx.de</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Hi -<br>
<br>
I think I'll stand back from this discussion. It's clear that I don't understand the constraints on Linux and that I'm pushing directions that are not appropriate. I would like to see the ability for new users on Linux to get to the latest versions though; if there's anything we can do to make this happen, please let us know.<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>I think Bert is simply saying that the place an image goes to check for up-to-date versions must be configurable such that a squeak package maintainer for a particular distro can easily make images in their distro check their site for updates, not <a href="http://squeak.org">squeak.org</a>. i.e. when one updates the debian squeak package one is not updating by installing stuff from <a href="http://squeak.org">squeak.org</a>.</div>
<div><br></div><div>What are the constraints? If the image needs to be identical then the location for the update check needs to be external to the image. e.g. on Unix we could (via a getenv: primitive and/or FFI call) access an environment variable (say SQUEAK_DISTRO__MOST_UP_TO_DATE_VERSION_URL ;) ;) ) and if this is not set the image code defaults to something like <a href="http://www.squeak.org/current_version">http://www.squeak.org/current_version</a>. The distro maintainer can then arrange to set the env var in the squeak shell script used to launch squeak. That's much easier to arrange than having to modify the image.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Am I presuming correctly Bert?</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>BTW, I notice we're already at version 404.</div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<br>
Cheers,<br><font color="#888888">
- Andreas</font><div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
Bert Freudenberg wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
On 16.12.2009, at 15:20, Andreas Raab wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Bert Freudenberg wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
And then what? <br>
</blockquote>
How the heck do I know? ;-) But you are sounding self-contradicting here. This discussion started with you pointing out that you wouldn't expect to find anything current in the package management system of choice.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I don't think I started the discussion this time, but it's true nonetheless, for now. But the solution IMHO is not ignoring the distro packages. Downloading from <a href="http://squeak.org" target="_blank">squeak.org</a> should become only the second-best option after the one expected by Linux users.<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
As a consequence I've been trying to find some ways by which we could get users the information that there's something more up to date.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Appreciated. But I don't think the primary problem is that people are unaware of newer versions, but that getting a current Squeak is harder than usual for Linux software.<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
But now you're saying leave it to the distro maintainers? Isn't that directly contradicting your initial statement? If we assume that the packages are generally current, then there's no point whatsoever to this entire discussion (which started by Igor pointing out that current packages are *not* current).<br>
<br>
Confused,<br>
- Andreas<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I'm looking for ways to actually fix this, not for more workarounds. And what we do as interim solution should not interfere with the proper way.<br>
<br>
So IMHO it is good if we provide a tarball on <a href="http://squeak.org" target="_blank">squeak.org</a> for those who like to install manually (though IMHO it should include an image, not like the one currently linked on the homepage).<br>
<br>
And we should at least not do anything that undermines the efforts of packagers, instead encouraging use of the distro packages. If nobody uses them they won't get fixed. So next time someone notices a problem with a distro package *please* file a bug report in the distro's tracker.<br>
<br>
- Bert -<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Linux has advanced beyond "./configure; make; make install". Downloading a tarball feels antiquated. Regular users don't do that anymore unless they absolutely have to. Package maintainers do and bundle this in a package for their distro.<br>
Even downloading a DEB or RPM from random web sites doesn't make it much better, because this interferes with distro packages, again bypassing the official update mechanism.<br>
IMHO the debs and rpms on <a href="http://squeak.org" target="_blank">squeak.org</a> should be removed, and maintenance moved to the respective distros. Empower and support the maintainers, like Debian's José Redrejo or Fedora's Gavin Romig-Koch or Mandriva's Aleksey Lim.<br>
- Bert -<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>