2009/4/19 Chris Kassopulo <ckasso at sprynet.com>

> Greetings all,
>
> On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 14:45:49 +0200, Matej Kosik wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Bert Freudenberg wrote:
> >> On 19.04.2009, at 01:25, Jerome Peace wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Hi Bert and all,
> >>>
> >>> Response to Berts reply:
> >>>
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2009-April/135572.html
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>> In the closed-source world (Mac, Win) typically the software
> >>>>>> authors provide binary packages for end users. This is even true
> >>>>>> for open- source software on these platforms, the authors provide
> >>>>>> ready-to- install packages, separate from with the source code.
> >>>>>> That's why we have Windows and Mac downloads on our website. It's a
> >>>>>> one-size-fits- all approach, and all work is done by the authors.
> >>>>
> >>>>> I would like to see something like this for Ubuntu. I think it is a
> >>>>> good place to start. It gives a reasonable goal to shoot for.
> >>>>> Lessons learned can then be applied to other squeak distro's one by
> >>>>> one.
> >>>>
> >>>> That already exists, but maybe Matej could need a hand:
> >>>>
> >>>> http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/3616
> >>>>
> >>> If he asks for help and there is help I can give, okay.
> >>
> >> Matej unsubscribed from squeak-dev about a year ago, saying he was
> >> still interested in Squeak but less enthusiastic. So it's unlikely he
> >> would ask for help, we have to offer it.
> >
> > The repository:
> > http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/3616
> > was I believe always meant as a intermediate solution before Squeak
> > enters usual distribution channels (Debian repositories, Ubuntu
> > repositories). I have been updating it for a while. I have failed to
> > register Squeak as a regular Debian package. Although, I have never
> > tried very hard.
> >
> > The problem raised by Jerome was caused by me. The published Squeak VM
> > works but without sound. The fix is easy---at compilation time, a few
> > other libraries must be present in the system and then the generated
> > SqueakVM can play sound. The configure script probably decides which
> > plugins to generate with respect to available prerequisities.
> >
> > Locally, I have fixed this on my machine now. I can post this to this
> > repository
> > http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/3616
> > It would fix the problem I caused. It is not yet there because I must
> > regain access to `squeak.org' to be able to upload updated versions of
> > packages.
> >
> > However, I am not sure if everybody realizes, that there is quite
> > intricate situation:
> > - There is Ian Piumarta who is the original author of the SqueakVM
> >   and probably knows everything about it (I really know very little
> >   about SqueakVM)
> > - There is me who maintains
> >   http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/3616
> >   (OK, I can read README and compile SqueakVM but I cannot solve real
> >    problems with the VM. I could look at it but I do not plan to do this
> >    because my focus moved. I am sorry. Squeak is wonderful, I liked it
> >    very much but I am now trying to solve different problems).
> > - There are people who registered SqueakVM as regular Debian package
> >   José Luis Redrejo <jredrejo at gmail.com> Now Debian (Lenny) contains
> >   SqueakVM. Although, there are no packages for Squeak images. I think
> >   this is the remnant of the old problem which nobody solved. Real
> >   dedicated work is needed to recognize Debian requirements (concerning
> >   licencing) and implement them (to choose a cleanest possible Squeak
> >   image and register it as a Debian package; or make some additional
> >   cleanups). I haven't done this. Jose's package is not based on Lex's
> >   or my work. It is better in some respects (support for 64-bit
> >   architecture---perhaps) (the negative part is missing packages with
> >   images)
>
> Yes it does seem to be a rather intricate situation and I'm not sure
> that I understand it yet. So your packaging efforts landed in Ubuntu
> and source is available at wiki.squeak.org. Jose started from a
> different source version. His packages, (binary and source) are
> available at Debian. In this case, the Ubuntu package was not based
> on a Debian package.
>
> The image problem would be that it can't be generated from source?
>
> Until the image problem is resolved users could be advised through
> the VM package description to download images of their choice at
> squeak.org. That is how the Debian package is set up now.
>
> > - Concerning Ubuntu, they usually base it on Debian packages.
> >   Today I have checked and they cite me, not Jose. That is weird because
> >   my packages are unofficial whereas Jose's packages are official. Maybe
> >   they are confused too.
> >
> >
>
> It seems that getting Ubuntu in sync with Debian would be the proper
> solution.
>
> >> I'm cc'ing a few of the people I know worked on DEB packages before.
> >> Guys - what do you think of the idea to have a mailing list
> >> specifically for packaging issues? Here is my initial post explaining
> >> the motivation:
> >>
> >>
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2009-April/135551.html
> >>
> >>
>
> I invited Jose and Jordan Mantha (ubuntu) to this thread.
>



I've been following this thread from its beginning but, honestly, I can not
guess what I could add. As far as I know, there are three deb packaging
branches:
- Packages from the squeak.org site
- Package in Ubuntu
- Package in Debian

I maintain the packages in Debian (for squeak-vm & etoys), and the
decissions I took when I did the squeak-vm package was continuing using the
principles I had been using when I did the package for LinEx (our Debian
based distribution in Extremadura, Spain): make the package as compatible as
possible with the one at squeak.org but adding integration with the Desktop
and making the non-developer user life easier. I discarded totally the
ubuntu packaging as it was using a very obsolete version of the vm and it
was full of bugs (and according to this thread, it hasn't changed to much
since then)

The squeak-vm package in Debian was updated, until the latest vm version. I
haven't updated it yet because there are not many improvements since the svn
version that's packaged and the main bugs (plugin integration, sound in 64
bits, etc. ) are still there. I'm waiting hopefully the road of the new
efforts in the vm team that has begun recently.

For the images, Bert has explained it perfectly: the etoys image is in sid
because there's no way to bootstrap it from some sources. With the new
efforts, it seems that can be achieved. Then I'd like to add some other
images, as the one we're using in Extremadura.

I must insist in one point: I'm not interested at all in the use of Squeak
for developers. Developers usually don't have problems in launching a
terminal if there're problems and know how to make things work. My packaging
effort is focused in end users, mainly teachers and students. I think that
can explain some of the decissions I took in the script that launches the
image, and that forked several years ago from the script that squeak.org was
using. On the other hand, once the vm has started, there's not difference in
the vm from Debian or the vm from Squeak.org. It's compilation is almost the
same. I just apply a couple of patches to the sources, one to fix a bug in
the browser plugin directories and another to remove ffmpeg support that can
not be considered free in Debian as it contains some patented algorithms and
code.

If there's something I can do now to improve the package in Debian I'm ready
to do it, but I haven't read in this thread any suggestion yet, appart of
the fact that there is three packaging versions, and that the package in
Ubuntu doesn't work.

Regards.
José L.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20090419/94155bf5/attachment.htm