[Vm-dev] VM Automated builds update

David T. Lewis lewis at mail.msen.com
Wed Mar 16 12:26:41 UTC 2011


On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 12:54:51PM +0100, Igor Stasenko wrote:
>  
> On 16 March 2011 02:49, David T. Lewis <lewis at mail.msen.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 09:22:27PM +0100, Igor Stasenko wrote:
> >>
> >> On 15 March 2011 17:35, Levente Uzonyi <leves at elte.hu> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, 15 Mar 2011, Igor Stasenko wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The main functional differences between SqueakVM and StackVM are:
> >> >>> - StackVM requires 6505 images (maybe 6504, i'm not sure) while SqueakVM
> >> >>> can
> >> >>> execute 6502, 6504 and 6505 images.
> >> >>
> >> >> not a big deal. I think everyone aware that Cog using newer image
> >> >> version(s).
> >> >
> >> > Not a big deal, for you.
> >> >
> >> > Someone just mentioned, that they're using 3.10-4 VM on Solaris, so they
> >> > don't use newer image versions. We also have some Squeak 3.9 images deployed
> >> > and we're not planning to upgrade them yet. The latest Etoys and Cobalt
> >> > releases use the old image format.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Well, if people decided to stick with old images, it is their choice.
> >> And once they decide to migrate,
> >> then there is a way to do that. I see nothing complicated there.
> >>
> >> Either you stay with old MS-DOS, and run your application using DosBox , or
> >> you run it on x64 compiled using modern compiler. The choice is always yours :)
> >>
> >
> > For whatever it may be worth, I intend to continue supporting the traditional
> > interpreter VM to the best of my ability for the forseeable future. I also
> > intend to help as best I can to support Cog and hopefully to help merge
> > code bases and reduce redundancy where possible. Finally, I think that the
> > work Igor is doing for automated builds is very valuable.
> >
> > Let's be glad for the progress that is being made with new VMs and new
> > build processes, but please do not assume that this progress comes at
> > the expense of all that has come before. It just ain't so.
> >
> 
> Dave, i didn't meant that it should be dropped immediately.
> If we want to migrate to Cog, someone has to make sure that things
> which worked in old VM,
> working in Cog as well. And apparently Eliot can't do it alone.
> And in terms of building infrastructure for VMs, it will make the
> whole process more controllable and
> predictable.

Agreed :) I just wanted to reassure folks who might have been concerned
that the standard VM would be neglected. That will not happen.

> And again, if any of you want to add the cmake configs into
> CMakeVMMaker which can be used to build
> traditional VMs, feel free to do that. Because i don't have a time to
> do that, it doesn't means that i am against it.

I also have limited time of course, and that does not mean I am
against progress ;)

Dave



More information about the Vm-dev mailing list