Hm… don’t really know but I guess they could come fromt the configuration. If you look for the string ‘seaside-pharo’ in the image then you’ll see that those packages are specified in the configuration. But if you really want to know you’ll probably have to step through a loading cycle with Metacello… good luck with that :)
On 16.02.2014, at 14:57, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote: > As far as I can see, there is no such package, at all, that is why I am > puzzled ;-) > > On 16 Feb 2014, at 14:50, Max Leske <[email protected]> wrote: > >> If you’ve loaded Seaside-Pharo then those extensions would be in the >> Seaside-Pharo package, wouldn’t they? >> >> >> On 16.02.2014, at 14:15, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> When using the latest Seaside on Pharo 3 (either loading >>> ConfigurationOfBootstrap or the Seaside image, 3.0 bleedingEdge, built on >>> the pharo-contribution CI server), I have two mysterious dirty packages >>> without a repository: >>> >>> - Seaside-pharo-core >>> - Seaside-pharo-core-backtracking >>> >>> These only contain extensions. There are no such Seaside package as far as >>> I can see. >>> >>> What puzzles me is how the code got in the image in the first place: I can >>> understand that these are possible wrong extension protocol names, but >>> since they must be loaded by an MC package, how did they get into that >>> package in the first place ? >>> >>> Sven >>> >>> -- >>> Sven Van Caekenberghe >>> http://stfx.eu >>> Smalltalk is the Red Pill >>> >>> >> >> > >
