Hi all,
I logged a bug in Mantis about loading latest code updates. I have an image built upon a fresh 7020 3.9 image and I cannot seem to "load code updates" to get the 3071 patch. Details are at http://bugs.impara.de/view.php?id=3400.
It might just be me or my image, but I'm not sure why I get the walkback about SMBase-gk.63 not found.
Any ideas or do I have to keep building new images from the latest and greatest to get fixes?
John
-- It's easy to have a complicated idea. It's very very hard to have a simple idea. -- Carver Mead
I meant to say, I cannot load updates to get the 7021 updates. Doh -- what the heck was thinking when I was typing? That wasn't even close. ;-)
On 3/29/06, John Pierce john@pierce.name wrote:
Hi all,
I logged a bug in Mantis about loading latest code updates. I have an image built upon a fresh 7020 3.9 image and I cannot seem to "load code updates" to get the 3071 patch. Details are at http://bugs.impara.de/view.php?id=3400.
It might just be me or my image, but I'm not sure why I get the walkback about SMBase-gk.63 not found.
Any ideas or do I have to keep building new images from the latest and greatest to get fixes?
John
-- It's easy to have a complicated idea. It's very very hard to have a simple idea. -- Carver Mead
-- It's easy to have a complicated idea. It's very very hard to have a simple idea. -- Carver Mead
Hi all,
Am I missing something here? I cannot seem to load code updates from a Squeak 3.9 image because Monticello appears to need a file that is not available on the source.squeakfoundation.org/39a location.
How does the community propose that we keep 3.9 images up to date or is "load code updates" no longer being used?
John
On 3/29/06, John Pierce john@pierce.name wrote:
Hi all,
I logged a bug in Mantis about loading latest code updates. I have an image built upon a fresh 7020 3.9 image and I cannot seem to "load code updates" to get the 7021 patch. Details are at http://bugs.impara.de/view.php?id=3400.
It might just be me or my image, but I'm not sure why I get the walkback about SMBase-gk.63 not found.
Any ideas or do I have to keep building new images from the latest and greatest to get fixes?
John
-- It's easy to have a complicated idea. It's very very hard to have a simple idea. -- Carver Mead
-- It's easy to have a complicated idea. It's very very hard to have a simple idea. -- Carver Mead
On 30.03.2006, at 02:50, John Pierce wrote:
Hi all,
I logged a bug in Mantis about loading latest code updates. I have an image built upon a fresh 7020 3.9 image and I cannot seem to "load code updates" to get the 3071 patch. Details are at http://bugs.impara.de/view.php?id=3400.
It might just be me or my image, but I'm not sure why I get the walkback about SMBase-gk.63 not found.
Do you have updated SqueakMap in the image? I think what is happening is this: SqueakMap loaded the 2.1 version, updating to the next alpha then will try to merge in the SqueakMap changes in the 3.9a repository. For that, it tries to get the common ancestor.
Now the repository registered with the in-image SqueakMap pakcages is wrong (old?) (modules.squeak...), resulting in the error.
Any ideas or do I have to keep building new images from the latest and greatest to get fixes?
There is no really good way... the update stream allow to load a script then then merges with the latest in the 3.9a repository. But that's slow, and sometimes the results are not good... (see earlier discussions on the list).
for 3.9b we think about using an updates based updatestream for making it easier to track changes.
Marcus
I logged a bug in Mantis about loading latest code updates. I have an image built upon a fresh 7020 3.9 image and I cannot seem to "load code updates" to get the 3071 patch. Details are at http://bugs.impara.de/view.php?id=3400.
It might just be me or my image, but I'm not sure why I get the walkback about SMBase-gk.63 not found.
Do you have updated SqueakMap in the image? I think what is happening is this: SqueakMap loaded the 2.1 version, updating to the next alpha then will try to merge in the SqueakMap changes in the 3.9a repository. For that, it tries to get the common ancestor.
Yes, I did "open" SqueakMap in my 7020 3.9 image which requires it to load the latest SqueakMap. There probably is no way around "not doing this upgrade" if you want to use SqueakMap in 3.9. Right?
Now the repository registered with the in-image SqueakMap pakcages is wrong (old?) (modules.squeak...), resulting in the error.
Yep -- this defintely seems to be happening.
Any ideas or do I have to keep building new images from the latest and greatest to get fixes?
There is no really good way... the update stream allow to load a script then then merges with the latest in the 3.9a repository. But that's slow, and sometimes the results are not good... (see earlier discussions on the list).
Ok, I was just more or less curious how everyone who is working on 3.9a gets the latest updates. I suspect from your response, it is not the "update" stream, but rather directly from MC repositories.
for 3.9b we think about using an updates based updatestream for making it easier to track changes.
Don't do it on my account. I am just trying to figure out how to work with the latest and greatest. If there is a good way to keep my image current that I'm not aware of then let me know.
Thanks,
John
On 02.04.2006, at 20:22, John Pierce wrote:
Yes, I did "open" SqueakMap in my 7020 3.9 image which requires it to load the latest SqueakMap. There probably is no way around "not doing this upgrade" if you want to use SqueakMap in 3.9. Right?
Yes. Or just not use it...
Ok, I was just more or less curious how everyone who is working on 3.9a gets the latest updates. I suspect from your response, it is not the "update" stream, but rather directly from MC repositories.
I personally rebuild my images quite often from scratch, and as a basis, I use the latest 3.9a. So I don't update my work-image using the update stream at all... but the images are quite hacked, so rebuilding them from scratch is a good thing to do to make sure that there is a way to re-create them at all.
I tend to like the rebuild more then the update way... rebuild makes sure that there is a defined process of getting form a standard image to whatever you are working on. When you just have one image that is updated, you can come in a situation where moving your stuff into a new image will be a lot of work.
To make the rebuild-from-scratch way really practical, it would be nice to have an automatic build-and-test server. This could rebuild from latest (release or alpha) + add all the cool tools + load your project's source and run all the tests. And all that automatically over night...
for 3.9b we think about using an updates based updatestream for making it easier to track changes.
Don't do it on my account. I am just trying to figure out how to work with the latest and greatest. If there is a good way to keep my image current that I'm not aware of then let me know.
updating an image is one of the weak spots of the current 3.9a process. In a way, it's much better then what we had: loading via the update stream as we did up to 3.8 will overwrite any change you did, MC will do a true merge. The negative side is that merging is of course much slower.
I will put the problem of the wrong SM repository on the TODO.
Marcus
Hi Marcus,
I personally rebuild my images quite often from scratch, and as a basis, I use the latest 3.9a. So I don't update my work-image using the update stream at all... but the images are quite hacked, so rebuilding them from scratch is a good thing to do to make sure that there is a way to re-create them at all.
Ok -- that's what I've been doing. I didn't realize that was the standard mode of operation for 3.9a.
To make the rebuild-from-scratch way really practical, it would be nice to have an automatic build-and-test server. This could rebuild from latest (release or alpha) + add all the cool tools + load your project's source and run all the tests. And all that automatically over night...
Well, it may not be exactly what you are looking for, but I did recently update my 3.9 build script: http://www.saltypickle.com/Home/18
It presently builds a 3.9a image with my favorite tools and configurations from a brand new image. It builds images with a boat load of my favorite packages in about 15 minutes. I suspect it could be automated to generate nightly builds.
Regards,
John
It's easy to have a complicated idea. It's very very hard to have a simple idea. -- Carver Mead
Well, it may not be exactly what you are looking for, but I did recently update my 3.9 build script: http://www.saltypickle.com/Home/18
It presently builds a 3.9a image with my favorite tools and configurations from a brand new image. It builds images with a boat load of my favorite packages in about 15 minutes. I suspect it could be automated to generate nightly builds.
Indeed this would be a good functionality, may be this should be added to the testServer running at: http://testserver.smallhosting.info/
In the context of building a testserver that would automatically take an image and run the tests (and remove or load some packages). one of the questions we had is how can we get a list of the packages to test for example a given dsitribution
On Apr 2, 2006, at 21:56 , stéphane ducasse wrote:
Indeed this would be a good functionality, may be this should be added to the testServer running at: http://testserver.smallhosting.info/
how comes that there are two test runs with different results for Squeak3.9alpha-7020?
It looks to me that this testrunner would be useful with just a bit more work. What seems missing is - show delta between two test runs - sending out reports by mail
Adrian
Yes they did not have enough time, they are planning to work on that during their other projects but we will see.
Stef
On 2 avr. 06, at 23:03, Adrian Lienhard wrote:
On Apr 2, 2006, at 21:56 , stéphane ducasse wrote:
Indeed this would be a good functionality, may be this should be added to the testServer running at: http://testserver.smallhosting.info/
how comes that there are two test runs with different results for Squeak3.9alpha-7020?
It looks to me that this testrunner would be useful with just a bit more work. What seems missing is
- show delta between two test runs
- sending out reports by mail
Adrian
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org
-
Adrian Lienhard -
John Pierce -
Marcus Denker -
stéphane ducasse