- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

SqueakSSL plugin v0.2.0 (was: Re: Fixes to the SqueakSSL Plugin)

by Das.Linux＠gmx.de

Dear Smalltalkers as a follow up to the SqueakSSL changes sent around yesterdayâ¦ On 21.04.2015, at 16:52, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux(a)gmx.de> wrote: > Dear Smalltalkers > > Starting with Levente Uzonyi's patches to the Linux version > of the SqueakSSL-Plugin, we (Marcel Taeumel and me) have > ported this to the OS X and Windows version as well. > > Find three binaries[1] that can be used instead of > the ones found on versions found on SqueakSSL's google code > page. > [â¦] > [1]: http://forum.world.st/file/n4820846/squeakssl.zip â¦ I'd like to thank Levente Uzonyi and Ron Teitelbaum for their input and providing infrastructure. I put together all files and have uploaded them to the new (in the googlecode-export sense) SqueakSSL gitHub project: https://github.com/itsmeront/squeakssl/ And tagged a release as v0.2.0 with a Zip of all binaries (linux32/64,osx,windows) https://github.com/itsmeront/squeakssl/releases/tag/v0.2.0 (scroll to bottom for the binaries zip: squeakssl_v0.2.0.zip) I hope this comes in handy for anyone who wants to play around with that. Best -Tobias

April 22, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] WhatsUp from: 2015-04-20 until: 2015-04-30

by Tudor Girba

Aha. We have the same issue with GT, so when building the development image, we first explicitly load all latest versions of ConfigurationOfG* from the project configuration. This should solve that problem. Doru On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 8:13 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: > From what I know: > the configruation of OSWindow in the repo is not loaded when there is a > configuration in the image. > Kind of > > Le 22/4/15 08:31, Tudor Girba a Ã©crit : > > Could JB describe the problem with Metacello? Perhaps there is a > workaround. > > Doru > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 3:27 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: > >> >> Hi phil >>>> >>>> just that you know what we are doing >>>> >>>> - Mathieu Lacatou an intern from Thales should be visiting the >>>> team for >>>> 10 days to pair program with esteban >>>> about the OSWindow multi-windowing support >>>> >>>> - JB and Merwan are extending the OSWindow touch support, like >>>> generating scroll events >>>> >>>> - JB is working on Woden and adding some shadders for 3D demoes. >>>> >>> I will have a new guy from Senegal starting to work tomorrow in my lab >>> on using GPU and Wooden for doing SPH&epidemiological modeling. >>> How to coordinate all these activities ? >>> >> >> Cool :) >> I do not know >> For now he should have a look at Woden, JB planned to make a CI. >> But he was blocked because of a bug in the old version of Metacello that >> we use. >> So as soon as Metacello is updated, JB can continue his build. >> >> Stef >> >>> >>> >> >> > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Every thing has its own flow" > > > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"

April 22, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] QualityAssistant v0.4

by Sean P. DeNigris

stepharo wrote > NO NO NO integration in the image. > NO external tools to talk to. NO NO NO Change your mindset. I was actually thinking specifically of new users. I already know how to load it and make extensive use of startup preferences so it doesn't really matter to me. But it's taken me 5 years to find all the cool extensions I use routinely. How will a new user appreciate our Ferrari when we give it to them without paint, headlights, or seats? Maybe we can have something like Edgar's FunSqueak, with all the cool IDE features, be the default download, but then, if we're not all using that image, we may commit a sin similar Marcus' repeated warning that "the artefact on the build server needs to be the artefact of release" of using a different image than we release... ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/QualityAssistant-v0-4-tp4821070p4821265.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

April 22, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] Integration process in presence of "external" project

by Esteban Lorenzano

> On 22 Apr 2015, at 21:17, Andrei Chis <chisvasileandrei(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 7:55 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr <mailto:stepharo@free.fr>> wrote: > andrei > > You talk about releasing. > I talk about changes that should be done on a system while people are not active. > > If we are all on vacation, or you really really need a bug fixed, or you make a change that touches a lot of > packages then I see no problem if you make a slice and notify us so we can back port it. > > What I would like to avoid is this becoming the default behaviour any time you want to make change that is > just related to a project that is maintain by configurations. > > Right now for rubric you can just commit you package to the rubric repo under the pharo team, create a new version > using versioner, copy it to PharoInbox50, make an issue to integrate it and integrate it. A few more steps then > working with slices but you do not have to wait for us to integrate :). You might get some merge conflicts > when we are actively working on rubric but then we are around to help with the merge. I will add a âcommit new versionâ option that will reduce the steps too. It will: - commit dirty packages from version to corresponding configuration, - generate and commit new version. - It will do it recursively with nested configurations so, this will solve all complains you might have :) Esteban > > Cheers, > Andrei > > > > Stef > > > Le 22/4/15 15:29, Andrei Chis a Ã©crit : >> In all new tools that we did we tried to have only 2-3 packages and use tags to organize classes in a packaged (GT-* has 9 packages for 3 projects). >> This allows for very simple configurations with clear dependencies. >> Glamour has more packages (17) but those should also be reduced, as we do not need such a low level of granularity. >> >> Given that support for working with multiple nested configuration is not great we can merge all GT-* projects into one configuration. >> I would still like to have different configurations for Glamour and Rubric as they are separate projects. >> So we can have just three configurations (each one for a separate project that can be released independent of the others): >> >> ConfigurationOfGToolkitCore >> ----> ConfigurationOfGlamourCore >> ---------> ConfigurationOfRubric >> >> This would make releasing a new version easier with the current support from versioner. >> Releasing a version for all three configurations at once would still require some manual updating of versions, but that's a less frequent use-case. >> >> Cheers, >> Andrei >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com <mailto:estebanlm@gmail.com>> wrote: >> exactly. >> what we need in the long term is a complete better integration process. >> I dream to have a git pharo project with submodules and pull requests. >> >> Slowly the tools are coming, but this will take time to implement. >> In the mean time, we need to do all the steps we can to allow us to achieve the modularisation goal. >> Even if they look not easy because we are still building it, or too used to previous ways of doing it. >> >> Esteban >> >> > On 22 Apr 2015, at 12:15, Pavel Krivanek <pavel.krivanek(a)gmail.com <mailto:pavel.krivanek@gmail.com>> wrote: >> > >> > And do not forget that with better Pharo modularization it will start >> > to be a problem on more lower level. When eg. Morphic will be an >> > "exteranal" Pharo package. >> > >> > -- Pavel >> > >> > 2015-04-22 12:03 GMT+02:00 Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com <mailto:estebanlm@gmail.com>>: >> >> >> >> On 22 Apr 2015, at 10:21, Andrei Chis <chisvasileandrei(a)gmail.com <mailto:chisvasileandrei@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> >> >> But this only works for releasing simple configurations that do not depend >> >> on other configurations. >> >> This would work for rubric, for example, but not for other configurations we >> >> have in gtools. >> >> >> >> >> >> then you have two options: >> >> >> >> 1) you rewrite your configurations to not need nested configurations. This >> >> is not recommendable in huge projects like Seaside, but things like GTools >> >> are easily (I did a quick check and your 3 configurations have in total 7 >> >> packagesâ¦ would not be a problem to have them without nesting projects and >> >> just using the packages). In fact, this is how Dale recommends using >> >> configurations (if I understood him right). >> >> 2) we enhance the tools to also allow the commit of nested packages. >> >> >> >> I think both approaches needs to be done: you donât need unnecessary >> >> complexity in your configurations and we need to add some nesting support to >> >> commit new version. >> >> >> >> What is not admisible, IMO, is to do something that is wrong just because it >> >> looks easier in the short term (and I say âin short termâ because what looks >> >> easier now will generate a lot of problems in the future). >> >> >> >> cheers, >> >> Esteban >> > >> >> >> > >

April 22, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] Integration process in presence of "external" project

by Andrei Chis

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 7:55 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: > andrei > > You talk about releasing. > I talk about changes that should be done on a system while people are not > active. > If we are all on vacation, or you really really need a bug fixed, or you make a change that touches a lot of packages then I see no problem if you make a slice and notify us so we can back port it. What I would like to avoid is this becoming the default behaviour any time you want to make change that is just related to a project that is maintain by configurations. Right now for rubric you can just commit you package to the rubric repo under the pharo team, create a new version using versioner, copy it to PharoInbox50, make an issue to integrate it and integrate it. A few more steps then working with slices but you do not have to wait for us to integrate :). You might get some merge conflicts when we are actively working on rubric but then we are around to help with the merge. Cheers, Andrei > > Stef > > > Le 22/4/15 15:29, Andrei Chis a Ã©crit : > > In all new tools that we did we tried to have only 2-3 packages and use > tags to organize classes in a packaged (GT-* has 9 packages for 3 > projects). > This allows for very simple configurations with clear dependencies. > Glamour has more packages (17) but those should also be reduced, as we do > not need such a low level of granularity. > > Given that support for working with multiple nested configuration is not > great we can merge all GT-* projects into one configuration. > I would still like to have different configurations for Glamour and Rubric > as they are separate projects. > So we can have just three configurations (each one for a separate project > that can be released independent of the others): > > ConfigurationOfGToolkitCore > ----> ConfigurationOfGlamourCore > ---------> ConfigurationOfRubric > > This would make releasing a new version easier with the current support > from versioner. > Releasing a version for all three configurations at once would still > require some manual updating of versions, but that's a less frequent > use-case. > > Cheers, > Andrei > > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> exactly. >> what we need in the long term is a complete better integration process. >> I dream to have a git pharo project with submodules and pull requests. >> >> Slowly the tools are coming, but this will take time to implement. >> In the mean time, we need to do all the steps we can to allow us to >> achieve the modularisation goal. >> Even if they look not easy because we are still building it, or too used >> to previous ways of doing it. >> >> Esteban >> >> > On 22 Apr 2015, at 12:15, Pavel Krivanek <pavel.krivanek(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > And do not forget that with better Pharo modularization it will start >> > to be a problem on more lower level. When eg. Morphic will be an >> > "exteranal" Pharo package. >> > >> > -- Pavel >> > >> > 2015-04-22 12:03 GMT+02:00 Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com>: >> >> >> >> On 22 Apr 2015, at 10:21, Andrei Chis <chisvasileandrei(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> But this only works for releasing simple configurations that do not >> depend >> >> on other configurations. >> >> This would work for rubric, for example, but not for other >> configurations we >> >> have in gtools. >> >> >> >> >> >> then you have two options: >> >> >> >> 1) you rewrite your configurations to not need nested configurations. >> This >> >> is not recommendable in huge projects like Seaside, but things like >> GTools >> >> are easily (I did a quick check and your 3 configurations have in >> total 7 >> >> packagesâ¦ would not be a problem to have them without nesting projects >> and >> >> just using the packages). In fact, this is how Dale recommends using >> >> configurations (if I understood him right). >> >> 2) we enhance the tools to also allow the commit of nested packages. >> >> >> >> I think both approaches needs to be done: you donât need unnecessary >> >> complexity in your configurations and we need to add some nesting >> support to >> >> commit new version. >> >> >> >> What is not admisible, IMO, is to do something that is wrong just >> because it >> >> looks easier in the short term (and I say âin short termâ because what >> looks >> >> easier now will generate a lot of problems in the future). >> >> >> >> cheers, >> >> Esteban >> > >> >> >> > >

April 22, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Vm-dev] ARM Cogit

by Eliot Miranda

Hi Holger, On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Holger Freyther <holger(a)freyther.de> wrote: > > > > On 22 Apr 2015, at 14:42, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > thanks to hard work by Tim Rowledge and Lars Wasserman we now have a > functional JIT for the ARM in the simulator. We're still probably some > weeks away from a functional ARM JIT VM; issues like instruction cache > flushing on real hardware can be tricky to solve. But we're at least ready > to start trying to compile the JIT VM for ARM. Doug, see that I added a > build directory for build.linux32ARM/squeak.cog.spur. Hopefully a fast VM > for Raspberry Pi and Android is only a few weeks away. > > tricky in which sense? The Linux kernel offers a syscall (cacheflush) > where one > provides the start page and end page and GCC provides a builtin function > for this > as well (__clear_cache). > that's good news. It wasn't always that easy. When we got the ARM JIT working for VisualWorks we had to use hand-rolled code to flush the cache as linux didn't provide a reliable function at that time. So perhaps we're closer than we think. But it's always wise to lengthen time estimates, not shorten them :-) holger > > > cache flush: > > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/a… -- best, Eliot

April 22, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] ARM Cogit

by Douglas McPherson

> On Apr 22, 2015, at 11:42, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi All, > > thanks to hard work by Tim Rowledge and Lars Wasserman we now have a functional JIT for the ARM in the simulator. We're still probably some weeks away from a functional ARM JIT VM; issues like instruction cache flushing on real hardware can be tricky to solve. But we're at least ready to start trying to compile the JIT VM for ARM. Doug, see that I added a build directory for build.linux32ARM/squeak.cog.spur. Hopefully a fast VM for Raspberry Pi and Android is only a few weeks away. > -- > best, > Eliot +1000 This is terrific news! Thanks to you, Tim, and Lars! Doug

April 22, 2015

Pb when exporting setting?

by Alexandre Bergel

Hi! I have an error: KeyNotFound: key #âWeight Below Thresholdâ not found in SystemDictionary Any idea whatâs going on? How can I reset the export? Where is this file by the way? I could not find it. cheers, Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

April 22, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Vm-dev] ARM Cogit

by Holger Freyther

> On 22 Apr 2015, at 14:42, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda(a)gmail.com> wrote: Hi, > thanks to hard work by Tim Rowledge and Lars Wasserman we now have a functional JIT for the ARM in the simulator. We're still probably some weeks away from a functional ARM JIT VM; issues like instruction cache flushing on real hardware can be tricky to solve. But we're at least ready to start trying to compile the JIT VM for ARM. Doug, see that I added a build directory for build.linux32ARM/squeak.cog.spur. Hopefully a fast VM for Raspberry Pi and Android is only a few weeks away. tricky in which sense? The Linux kernel offers a syscall (cacheflush) where one provides the start page and end page and GCC provides a builtin function for this as well (__clear_cache). holger cache flush: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/a…

April 22, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] ARM Cogit

by Thierry Goubier

Yes! Thanks to all for that effort. Thierry Le 22/04/2015 20:42, Eliot Miranda a Ã©crit : > Hi All, > > thanks to hard work by Tim Rowledge and Lars Wasserman we now have > a functional JIT for the ARM in the simulator. We're still probably > some weeks away from a functional ARM JIT VM; issues like instruction > cache flushing on real hardware can be tricky to solve. But we're at > least ready to start trying to compile the JIT VM for ARM. Doug, see > that I added a build directory for build.linux32ARM/squeak.cog.spur. > Hopefully a fast VM for Raspberry Pi and Android is only a few weeks away. > -- > best, > Eliot

April 22, 2015