A squeak3.4 VM will be needed
John M McIntosh
johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com
Thu Jan 16 23:31:27 UTC 2003
On Thursday, January 16, 2003, at 02:53 PM, <Jim.Gettys at hp.com> wrote:
> As a newbie, I can tell you that it is very confusing when you have a
> with a VM and a bag of bits that must be used together to find that
> is no VM version to match the bag of bits.
Jim it's a bit more complicated, you see the VM needs only to be
compiled when a change in
the image or to the VM code itself requires an update. Thus you could
have a VM that is hundreds of
patch numbers older than the image because none of the image changes
force a VM change.
Also there is some loose attempt to ensure newer and older VM's will
run older or newer images,
usually across version boundaries
I think the VM maintainers would welcome someone with quite a few days
of idle time and a
windows, mac and linux machine to construct a matrix of which released
image version works
with which VM version.
For the macintosh VM, newer VMs are significantly faster and lots of
bug fixes than a 3.0 VM,
yet someone using a 3.0 image is unclear on the fact he could migrate
to a 3.4 VM .
What's not clear is the risk of doing that, certainly I've tried to
enable such a migration, but no
"formal" documentation/statement exists.
PS any known macintosh VM/image version issues should be emailed to me.
John M. McIntosh <johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com> 1-800-477-2659
Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd. http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
More information about the Squeak-dev