- Pharo-users - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-users] (no subject)

by stephan

On 17-09-17 05:21, Sean P. DeNigris wrote: > Was this issue [1] fixed: >> I think I found it. It seems to be a bug in the way Launcher/Pharo unzips >> the downloaded VM. >> The symlink libgit2.dylib becomes unlinked and appears as just a regular >> file. If I delete the >> Pharo.app and unzip 70.zip (which btw maybe should have been deleted >> during cleanup after >> the dl) to ./vms/70, the error disappears! > > [1] From > http://forum.world.st/Launcher-Error-w-Pharo-7-tt4959777.html#a4960417 That sounds like the problem I encountered Stephan

Sept. 17, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] (no subject)

by stephan

On 14-09-17 22:52, Christophe Demarey wrote: > For Pharo 7 images, no sources file are dowloaded since they come with the image. They are not installed Stephan

Sept. 17, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] execute a code block at a given time in pharo ?

by Daniel BLANC

Thanks Stef, this app is just a quick hack but I already can stop the wifi from my phone and I feel like I have new negociations superpowers... Thanks HernÃ¡n ! That's a perfect fit :) On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 9:24 PM HernÃ¡n Morales Durand < hernan.morales(a)gmail.com> wrote: > http://www.smalltalkhub.com/#!/~TorstenBergmann/Scheduler > > Cheers, > > HernÃ¡n > > 2017-09-13 17:36 GMT-03:00 Daniel BLANC <daniel.blanc(a)gmail.com>: > > Hi All, > > > > I'm a very beginner with smalltalk. I am building a small seaside app for > > controlling wifi access of my teenagers kids. In this app I need to > start or > > stop the wifi acces at a given time. > > For the moment I'm doing it with an infinite loop in a process, with this > > code: > > > > WifiController >> startScheduler > > ^ SchedulerProcess > > ifNil: [ SchedulerProcess := [ [ true ] > > whileTrue: [ self schedulerApplyAutoStartStopRules. > > 56 seconds wait ] ] forkNamed: 'DanWifiManagerScheduler' ] > > > > > > I'm wondering if there is a way to do this without this infinite loop ? > May > > be there is a class in the standard pharo image that can execute a code > > block at a given time ? > > > > Thanks, > > Daniel > >

Sept. 17, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] Pharo 7 license question

by Jimmie Houchin

I understand that Pharo people will in general want to stay away from the GPL. I just didn't know if it would potentially be more equivalent to how other languages work. In Python to my understanding I could do something like #into my MIT licensed app import GPL_library import MIT_library And the GPL not be viral in my app provided I only use the GPL library and am not modifying it in my app. Do I understand this wrong? I haven't yet investigated Pharo 7 yet, so I do not know what would be similar to the above. MyMITClass #initialize "Install configurationOfGPL package" self useGPLPackage Yes it is contrived. But I am trying to see why Pharo would be different? Both are loading GPL code and running it in a mixed system. Regarding dual-licensing. I don't think that is likely. Most of these people prefer the GPL and use it because they want its viral nature and dislike the permissiveness of MIT software. They want to constrain they software. Thanks to all who replied. I just thought I would ask. Jimmie On 09/16/2017 02:17 AM, Stephane Ducasse wrote: > I do not think that the bootstrap changed anything. :) > We will stay away from GPL. > May be you can talk to the people of the libraries you want to use and > see if they are interested in a dual license. > > Stef > > On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:49 PM, Jimmie Houchin <jlhouchin(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Pharo 7 to my understanding fundamentally changes Pharo. It is my >> understanding that Pharo 7 starts with a core Pharo kernel and like many >> languages out there, imports or adds code from a variety of external sources >> to the image being built. >> >> With that understanding, I am curious if that would allow for inclusion of a >> specific library/module to be licensed as GPL? And it not affect the other >> code in the composed image? >> >> I am a big believer in the MIT/BSD license and not a big fan of the GPL. >> However, there is software out there that I have avoided looking at the >> source code or attempting to port it to Pharo because it is GPL. I would >> sincerely love if I could now port such a library and license it under the >> GPL as required, and it not affect any other code outside of that specific >> library. >> >> I am not a lawyer. Nor do I know any lawyers. Is is possible for someone to >> get a reasonably definitive answer on this question? >> >> I am sure I am not the only one who has had this desire. I am also sure that >> I am not the only one who will have this question in the future. So it would >> be nice to have a proper legal response that could possibly be explicitly >> stated somewhere on the website or on an FAQ or something. >> >> Regardless of the answer, yes or no. It does need to be a settled issue for >> Pharo. That way someone could know if GPL/LGPL or whatever software could be >> in the catalog. >> >> Just wanted to put that out there to the community. I look forward to the >> answer, should one be or become available. >> >> Thanks. >> >> >> Jimmie >> >> >>

Sept. 17, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] (no subject)

by Sean P. DeNigris

demarey wrote > Let us know if everything is fine. Was this issue [1] fixed: > I think I found it. It seems to be a bug in the way Launcher/Pharo unzips > the downloaded VM. > The symlink libgit2.dylib becomes unlinked and appears as just a regular > file. If I delete the > Pharo.app and unzip 70.zip (which btw maybe should have been deleted > during cleanup after > the dl) to ./vms/70, the error disappears! [1] From http://forum.world.st/Launcher-Error-w-Pharo-7-tt4959777.html#a4960417 ----- Cheers, Sean -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html

Sept. 17, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] Pharo 7 license question

by stephan

On 16-09-17 18:51, Peter UhnÃ¡k wrote: > This is the reason why LGPL exists. LGPL is not contagious. It is not clear that that would be the case with smalltalk. We tend to reuse by subclassing, and linking is not so well-defined. There is no license that has the same effect as LGPL has for c programs for smalltalk. Stephan

Sept. 17, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] PlotMorph on Pharo 6.1

by Stephane Ducasse

Tx Stefan I was planning to do the same. On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 3:41 PM, stephan <stephan(a)stack.nl> wrote: > On 16-09-17 09:29, Stephane Ducasse wrote: >> >> I'm on 10.12.6. too >> I downloaded Pharo 32 using the link. >> And I loaded from Catalog and I cannot get the problem. >> May be there is a problem with a setting in the compiler. >> I will talk to the guys monday. > > > Meta6, 7 and PlotMorph repos > > Name: ConfigurationOfPlotMorph-StephanEggermont.6 > Author: StephanEggermont > Time: 16 September 2017, 3:39:18.049684 pm > UUID: 246e825f-b015-0d00-a8c8-7793003b8086 > Ancestors: ConfigurationOfPlotMorph-StephanEggermont.5 > > No longer assign to block parameters in Pharo 6 and 7 > > Name: PlotMorph-StephanEggermont.9 > Author: StephanEggermont > Time: 16 September 2017, 3:26:48.762733 pm > UUID: e138d932-b015-0d00-a8c9-885a003b8086 > Ancestors: PlotMorph-StephanEggermont.8 > > No longer assign to block parameters > >

Sept. 16, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] Pharo 7 license question

by Peter UhnÃ¡k

> someone to get a reasonably definitive answer on this question? you would get that only from a copyright layer... and definitive answer only from a judge ;) I don't see how Pharo bootstrap changes anything. If you mean that you can now add library after bootstrap... well you can do that now already with any previous Pharo version. GPL is viral infection, so if you decide to bundle Pharo with your GPL-ed code, then the whole package will be terminally infected, including all the source code. Pharo or any other loaded libraries in the distro will be considered as GPL. Pharo is under MIT, so you can sublicense it, however if someone decided to contribute some code to your distribution (even if it was to Pharo), the contribution would be considered GPL and only the author would be able to put it to Pharo under the original MIT license. If you are wondering whether you can distribute Pharo with GPL code linked to it and keep the rest MIT, then the answer is no (and GPL v3 is particularly anal about this, as people are trying to work around it with v2). This is the reason why LGPL exists. LGPL is not contagious. But again, I don't see how Pharo bootstrap changes any of this. Peter On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 9:17 AM, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I do not think that the bootstrap changed anything. :) > We will stay away from GPL. > May be you can talk to the people of the libraries you want to use and > see if they are interested in a dual license. > > Stef > > On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:49 PM, Jimmie Houchin <jlhouchin(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Pharo 7 to my understanding fundamentally changes Pharo. It is my > > understanding that Pharo 7 starts with a core Pharo kernel and like many > > languages out there, imports or adds code from a variety of external > sources > > to the image being built. > > > > With that understanding, I am curious if that would allow for inclusion > of a > > specific library/module to be licensed as GPL? And it not affect the > other > > code in the composed image? > > > > I am a big believer in the MIT/BSD license and not a big fan of the GPL. > > However, there is software out there that I have avoided looking at the > > source code or attempting to port it to Pharo because it is GPL. I would > > sincerely love if I could now port such a library and license it under > the > > GPL as required, and it not affect any other code outside of that > specific > > library. > > > > I am not a lawyer. Nor do I know any lawyers. Is is possible for someone > to > > get a reasonably definitive answer on this question? > > > > I am sure I am not the only one who has had this desire. I am also sure > that > > I am not the only one who will have this question in the future. So it > would > > be nice to have a proper legal response that could possibly be explicitly > > stated somewhere on the website or on an FAQ or something. > > > > Regardless of the answer, yes or no. It does need to be a settled issue > for > > Pharo. That way someone could know if GPL/LGPL or whatever software > could be > > in the catalog. > > > > Just wanted to put that out there to the community. I look forward to the > > answer, should one be or become available. > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > Jimmie > > > > > > > >

Sept. 16, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] PlotMorph on Pharo 6.1

by stephan

On 16-09-17 09:29, Stephane Ducasse wrote: > I'm on 10.12.6. too > I downloaded Pharo 32 using the link. > And I loaded from Catalog and I cannot get the problem. > May be there is a problem with a setting in the compiler. > I will talk to the guys monday. Meta6, 7 and PlotMorph repos Name: ConfigurationOfPlotMorph-StephanEggermont.6 Author: StephanEggermont Time: 16 September 2017, 3:39:18.049684 pm UUID: 246e825f-b015-0d00-a8c8-7793003b8086 Ancestors: ConfigurationOfPlotMorph-StephanEggermont.5 No longer assign to block parameters in Pharo 6 and 7 Name: PlotMorph-StephanEggermont.9 Author: StephanEggermont Time: 16 September 2017, 3:26:48.762733 pm UUID: e138d932-b015-0d00-a8c9-885a003b8086 Ancestors: PlotMorph-StephanEggermont.8 No longer assign to block parameters

Sept. 16, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] UFFI problem / doubt

by alvaro piorno

Hi Stephan, Thanks for your answer, i found the booklet, but it was a draft, so it was incomplete. An example of FFIOpaqueObject would be healpful, i think. Esteban already talked to me, and is helping me with this. What do you mean with "Chipmunk existing bindings" ?. 2017-09-16 4:42 GMT-03:00 Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com>: > Hi alvaro > > Thanks for the question. If you have any suggestion for the booklet on > UFFI let us know. > I will let esteban anwser because I do not know. > BTW did you check the chipmunk existing bindings? > > Stef > > On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 3:42 PM, alvaro piorno > <alvaropiorno100(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi everybody, iÂ´m using UnifiedFFI with Chipmunk2D library . > > I want to get a pointer to a C Structure (cpBody) and set a position to > it. > > I have a subClass of FFIOpaqueObject to handle pointer. > > > > This is the "new " ffiCall : > > self ffiCall: #(cpBody* cpBodyNew(cpFloat m, cpFloat i)) > > > > And this is a "seter" ffiCall: > > > > self ffiCall: #( void cpBodySetPosition( self, cpVect vector ) ). > > > > I`m not getting any "error" but the position is not updating. > > I tried the same using Chipmunk directly and it works, so there is a > problem > > with what i have in Pharo. > > Any suggestion? > > Thanks in advance. > > > > Alvaro Piorno > >

Sept. 16, 2017