On Jun 18, 2013, at 1:52 PM, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 18 June 2013 13:26, Guillermo Polito <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> well... afaik, no one outside pharo community is using the configurations, >>> the other guys on vm-dev prefer the old way of doing things. >>> >>> also, the group "pharo" is intended to include the things necessary to >>> produce a "pharo vm"... this is what time ago was in the >>> ConfigurationOfPharoVM. That means: you can produce a CogVM without loading >>> group "pharo", but not a Pharo VM. >> >> >> so so... Because without the compatibility package the configuration does >> not even load in Pharo, and then you can build air only :). >> > > and even more, your changes imply that code will be loaded into Pharo > image with FS. > So, there's two concerns: > - whether ConfigurationOfCog should load cleanly on squeak image(s) honestly, we should not take that into account. Squeak guys are not using configuration to build their VMs, and then we should not care about keeping it compatible (in fact, I doubt is compatible now). Not that I would not like that they use it, but if they don't, I prefer to use the few time we all have into something more productive :) > - whether you can use loaded stuff to produce non-pharo VM yes this is an issue, but as the configurations are made, if you are able to build a pharovm, you are also able to build a cogvm. > > for first one, i don't remember when the last time i tried it and it > will probably won't work, so no big deal > for second one, it is important to keep lettling people choose what > they want to build. exactly :) Esteban > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko. >
