[squeak-dev] Re: Release packaging

Hannes Hirzel hannes.hirzel at gmail.com
Fri Apr 29 15:01:46 UTC 2011


Yes, unzip.

You do not need to rename the file. croquet.exe. Just double click and
then it looks for the image file and launches it.

But I think you cannot go back to squeak.exe after you have started
and saved the image with croquet.exe. (Others please correct me)

--Hannes

On 4/29/11, Ben Coman <btc at openinworld.com> wrote:
> Do you mean extract cogwin.zip into the Squeak-All-In-One folder and then
> rename croquet.exe to squeak.exe ?
>
> Hannes Hirzel wrote:
>>
>> To have Squeak with Cog I replaced the old Squeak VM with a Cog one
>> from http://www.mirandabanda.org/files/Cog/VM/ (MSWindows)
>>
>> --Hannes
>>
>> On 4/29/11, Ben Coman <btc at openinworld.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hannes Hirzel wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I agree. Does this imply that two all-in-one packages are needed, a
>>>> Cog and an non-cog?
>>>>
>>>> --Hannes
>>>>
>>>> On 4/28/11, Levente Uzonyi <leves at elte.hu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Since this isn't the first time people do benchmarks, but don't
>>>>> download
>>>>> VMs independently, therefore I think we have to package VMs with the
>>>>> releases in the future. IIRC someone even concluded that Pharo is
>>>>> faster
>>>>> than Squeak, but he just used what he got from the website (Cog for
>>>>> Pharo
>>>>> and the interpreter vm for Squeak).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Levente
>>>>>
>>>
>>> Is the difference between a Cog and non-Cog VM just the a different exe
>>> (for windows)?
>>> How compatible are the images for Cog and non-Cog?
>>> Could two executables be included in a single All-In-One package - ie
>>> named like SqueakClassic.exe & SqueakCog.exe ?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list