More on Squeak installation

Bob Arning arning at charm.net
Wed Jan 3 14:47:26 UTC 2001


Hi Peter,

On Wed, 3 Jan 2001 06:25:48 -0500 "Peter Schuller" <peter.schuller at infidyne.com> wrote:
>I am now attempting to re-install Squeak from scratch again. And I want the
>latest version. I do have a working 2.9, but it's ugly (2.7 VM and 2.9
>image/changes forced upon the VM on start-up).

I'm not clear why you think this is ugly. There need not be a one-to-one correspondence between VMs and images. I have lots of image/changes combos that I can run using a single VM. I also have lots of VMs (representing different optimizations, e.g.) that I can use to run one image.

>Is there now a way to file in the post-2.8 changes to my image? The 2.9
>changes file contains ALL changes since V2. So they would duplicate the 2.8
>changes. Is there an archive of all .cs additions perhaps? If so, I should
>be able to identify what's post-2.8.

If you want to start from 2.8, then evaluate

	EToySystem eToyVersion: 'Squeak2.9alpha' date: Date today printString

and choose world menu/help/update code from server. Note: this will take a fairly long time since there have been many updates since 2.8, so you are probably better off going with the 2.9 image that you downloaded.

>I'm still not quite sure about the 2.9 image. The fresh 2.8 install's
>welcome message says "Squeak 2.8". Yet, using the same squeak binary and
>giving it the 2.9 image/changes, it says "Squeak 2.7". So it appears that 2.9 is not
>a child (when looking at the changes structure as a tree) of 2.8, but was
>rather forked *before* the advent of 2.8[1]. If so, it would imply there is no
>safe way of applying post-2.8 changes to a 2.8 image, because the only
>version of 2.9 available is a child of a pre-2.8 changes set. I am convinced
>this is not the case however; I just don't know what *is* the case...

The 2.9 image that you got is probably one that has been continuously updated since 2.7. The code is quite current; it's just the text in the window that is a little older. This should have no effect on its use. 

The 2.9 image is also *mostly* a child of 2.8. I say mostly because, after 2.9 updates began appearing, some problems were found in 2.8 that needed fixing (most had already been fixed in 2.9). As a result, 2.8 has a few additional updates past the point where 2.9 was spawned. Again, I don't think these will have any harmful effect if you choose to take the 2.8 image and update it to 2.9 (although it might be faster just to grab the current 2.9 image as mentioned above).

Cheers,
Bob





More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list