[Vm-dev] Help/advice tracking down a squeak-vm regression

[Bert Freudenberg]

On 08.05.2012, at 14:36, Alex Bradbury wrote:

> 
> On 8 May 2012 13:21, David T. Lewis <lewis at mail.msen.com> wrote:
>> As far as I know, Scratch images have not worked on standard Squeak VMs
>> for a number of years, and Scratch has always relied on shipping its
>> own VM. In addition to fundamental changes in the VM itself that have
>> taken place in recent years, I believe that the Scratch version of the
>> VM also includes a couple of plugins (add-in functionality) that are
>> required for Scratch but not included in Squeak.
>> 
>> I think I see one source of confusion here. I just read the link at
>> http://info.scratch.mit.edu/Source_Code and find the following statement:
> 
> As I say, the Scratch.image does work out of the box on squeak-vm 4.0
> (yes, you do need to compile the squeak plugins for scratch). See e.g.
> Miriam's armel Scratch packages here http://www.miriamruiz.es/scratch/
> which just rely on the distribution's squeak-vm. Would it be correct
> to say the fact that Scratch worked on squeak-vm 4.0 was a happy
> coincidence, and so the view from the perspective of squeak-vm is that
> Scratch should either bundle its own VM, or update the image for
> compatibility with the latest squeak-vm?
> 
> (CCing in Amos Blanton who participated in the Debian bug report.
> Amos, the thread starts here
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/vm-dev/2012-May/010551.html)
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Alex


Ah. Somehow I missed the beginning of this thread. The Debian bug report talks about a 64 bit VM:

	http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=471927

Compiling on 64 bits is not yet fully supported.

We need to figure out the 32 bit problem first, only then can we dig into 64 bits (but the recommended way is still to run in 32 bit compatibility mode).

- Bert -