SAR

Stephen Pair spair at acm.org
Wed Nov 20 05:59:54 UTC 2002


Yeah it's probably not worth the trouble.

- Stephen

-----Original Message-----
From: squeak-dev-admin at lists.squeakfoundation.org
[mailto:squeak-dev-admin at lists.squeakfoundation.org]On Behalf Of Ned
Konz
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 12:25 AM
To: squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
Subject: Re: SAR


On Tuesday 19 November 2002 08:43 pm, Stephen Pair wrote:

> Have you seen how Craig did his flow SqueakMap entry?  He has a
> chunk of Smalltalk code at the beginning of a zip archive.  This
> chunk of code makes it possible to simply file-in flow  directly
> from the zip archive (it will read itself and proceed to unzip the
> archive and file in the individual change sets).  This is very
> clever.  I think it would be neat to have SAR files use this
> technique...then someone wanting to load a SAR won't need an
> installer at all.  We could just use the normal filein for SAR
> files and not need any special code for filing in the SAR.

You know, I started out having SARs do this.

But then I was discouraged by some discussion on the list by people 
who thought that wasn't an important feature.

Part of the problem, of course, is that you have to do something like 
Craig did to actually find the zip stream (he went up the caller 
stack...).

Anyway, I built in the writePrepending: stuff in ZipArchive for just 
this kind of application; I may do it someday. The downside is that 
the code to do the installs would have to be added to each SAR, and 
can't be compressed itself (it has to be vanilla Smalltalk code).

However, since most SARs will be appearing in SqueakMap, it seems like 
we should probably just install the SARInstaller stuff (it's small, 
anyway) along with SqueakMap.

-- 
Ned Konz
http://bike-nomad.com
GPG key ID: BEEA7EFE






More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list