On Thu, 2008-04-24 at 10:34 +0200, Philippe Marschall wrote:
> 2008/4/24 Norbert Hartl <norbert at hartl.name>:
> >
> > On Thu, 2008-04-24 at 11:23 +1000, Edward Stow wrote:
> >  > On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert at hartl.name> wrote:
> >  > >
> >  > > On Thu, 2008-04-24 at 08:20 +1000, Edward Stow wrote:
> >  > >  > On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 3:35 PM, Miguel Enrique Cobá Martínez
> >  > >  > <m.coba.m at gmail.com> wrote:
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > > >
> >  > >  > >  I use squeak inside a chroot as per instructions here:
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  http://alioth.debian.org/docman/view.php/30192/21/debian-amd64-howto.html
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  as there is no 64 bit perfect setup for squeak
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  I installed squeak inside the chroot with the repositories from squeak.org
> >  > >  > > (section other OSes)
> >  > >  > >
> >  > >  > >  hope this help
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > Yes is does -- it does confirm that a simple install is not available
> >  > >  > for amd64 architecture.  By simple, I mean  sudo apt-get install
> >  > >  > squeak.
> >  > >
> >  > >  > And it doesn't.  I have a hard time convincing my sys admins and their
> >  > >  > bosses to take seriously a package that does not have a
> >  > >  > straightforward install process on 64 bit machines.
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > chroot'ing in their words is for 'legacy and un-supported systems that
> >  > >  > should not be installed on a production server.'
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > I am trying to set up a demonstration server that will allow squeak
> >  > >  > with seaside to be considered a viable alternative.  I should say that
> >  > >  > I'm not a sys admin and am feeling very frustrated with the lack of
> >  > >  > installable options.
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > So please ... could those that maintain the debian and / or other os
> >  > >  > vms create an installable 64 bit deb and / or rpm.
> >  > >  >
> >  > >
> >  > >  At the moment there is no packaged version which does compile on amd64.
> >  > >  Otherwise it would be quite simple to create such a package. You can run
> >  > >  32 bit applications on 64 bit but on a debian package level this is not
> >  > >  an easy task to achieve.
> >  > >
> >  > >  If you want to setup an demonstration server why you don't take the
> >  > >  installer script which comes with the vm package on squeakvm.org ? This
> >  > >  installs the 32bit binaries on your machine.
> >  > >
> >  > >  I created a package for you which is a amd64 target ubuntu package which
> >  > >  contains the binaries from the 3.10.1 i686 package from squeakvm.org.[1]
> >  > >  It installs into /opt/squeak. You can use use
> >  > >
> >  > >  /opt/squeak/bin/squeakvm YOUR-IMAGE
> >  > >
> >  > >  to start squeak. Don't be misled by the ubuntu in the package name. It
> >  > >  should install on debian as well.
> >  > >
> >  > >  Let me know if you have trouble using it.
> >  > >
> >  > >  [1] http://selfish.org/files/deb/squeak-vm-i686_0.1ubuntu1_amd64.deb
> >  > >
> >  > >  Norbert
> >  >
> >  > Thanks that works.
> >  >
> >  > But this is really a plea --- My guess is that 95% of potential users
> >  > would have stopped by now  when apt-get install does not work.
> >  >
> >  Yes, sure it is. For the desktop side of the software the barrier is
> >  lowered with the one-click experience images.
> >  To be honest. How far will you get on a server if an easy installation
> >  is your barrier? squeak does not provide any start/stop scripts for the
> >  image. There is no maintenance scripts nor is there logging. You have
> >  to know your software in order to use it properly. You are right I often
> >  wish, too, that some things are achievable easier. But that includes the
> >  configuration of a apache/tomcat webserver, too.
> >  If you pass all this you still have to beat your sys admins. And that is
> >  a hard task :) Taking your arguments (from the sys ads) and my
> >  assumption that you are using java server stuff there is a huge gap.
> >  They say "un-supported" and they use debian which is an OS which is not
> >  supported. You should use ubuntu for that. They care about production
> >  systems and they use a 64 bit OS version. There are really less needs to
> >  have a 64 bit OS nowadays but there are still some problems. If I care
> >  about stability I use 32 bit these days. Are you using java? Java on 64
> >  bit linux systems is just not stable.
> 
> May I ask what makes you make such claims? Especially considering the
> amount of really large production 64 bit deployments.
> 
That is a good question. This is mainly influenced by my experience
with 64 bit linux installs and java runtime problems in the past. But
this could be outdated. I'm sorry it is not very clever to make such
claims without having the right arguments.
On the other side desktop java on my 64 bit ubuntu hardy system is a
pain. I'm propably be misled.

Norbert