On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, Ralph P. Boland wrote:

> I tried installing Squeak 3.4 on a PC running Debian Woody but
> without success.

Did you get this from Lex's archives?.  If so he can probably help you out
better than I can't.

> I created a subdirectory of my home directory. Then I downloaded the
> software there and did an install (as root). I then did a man squeak
> which worked.
> 
> I did a "which squeak" which finds  squeak
> and a "which inisqueak" which DOES NOT FIND inisqueak.

I think Lex bundles inisqueak into a seperate archive.  Look for one
called "inisqueak_3.4-x_i386.deb".  In contrast, the .debs (and .rpms) on
my Squeak page include it along with the image (e.g.,
squeak-image_3.6b-5402_all.deb) since its principal function is to install
a local copy of the image for first-time users.

> Though I have root privaliges I almost never use it

You are living a Very Honourable Life, sir.  (You can recognise a Really
Good Sysadmin by the fact that they jump through hoops of real fire to
avoid ever having to become root. ;)

> thing I want to do is install linux (Debian or Redhat) and then squeak. 

Debian is aimed more towards Linux-savvy users, although it's getting more
and more user-friendly every day (and the online documentation is
excellent).  RedHat is billed as plug-and-play for absolutely anyone.  
OTOH, in my experience, Debian has _much_ better support than RedHat for
up-to-the-minute hardware in the "testing" distribution (which, despite
the name, has given me nothing but 100% reliable, rock-solid service on
both Pentium and PPC).

> Also, is there a standard place to install squeak?

The .rpms and .debs all install into /usr/bin, /usr/lib, /usr[/share/]man
and /usr[/share]/doc.  The tarballs (or a "make install" from a default
configuration of the sources) install into /usr/local/{bin,lib,doc,man}.
Either way the end result (other than the path) is identical.  Which you
prefer is a matter of choice, although I'd advise against mixing the two.

> How large a system do I need to run squeak efficiently?

Depends on what you're trying to do.  Many people here (e.g., myself) have
been using it just fine since the days of 133MHz 386s with 32 MB RAM.  
With a 1GHz pentium there's nothing that feels sluggish.  On a 3+ GHz
pentium it screams and blows...  For most purposes it fits just fine into
24 MB of memory.

> Also, how slow is it? 

Depending on what you're doing, expect around 10-15% +/-epsilon the speed
of C code.  OTOH, it's _far_ easier to write much more
advanced/intelligent algorithms in Smalltalk than it is in most other
languages.

> I will be building an application that
> will scale up to some large problems both in terms of memory used
> and time consumed.

The Unix VM has options to tune memory usage.  By default it will happily
let your image grow to 1 GByte (or 75% of your available physical memory,
whichever is smaller).  If this isn't appropriate, RTFM for the relevant
command-line options.

Ian