Hi Sven, An experimental build of the VM works again on Sierra (I’ve tested this one: https://bintray.com/estebanlm/pharo-vm/build/201609201407#files <https://bintray.com/estebanlm/pharo-vm/build/201609201407#files>). The problem was with the bundle code and a change from Apple’s side to Cocoa. The new VM is a Spur VM of course. If you need a Cog VM, you can try a Squeak VM (e.g. 'Croquet Closure Cog VM [CoInterpreterPrimitives VMMaker.oscog-eem.1095] Squeak Cog 4.0.3282’) or run the current PharoVM in a virtual machine on Linux (as I’ve done).
Concerning Fuel: the versioning problem is a known and big issue I have to admit. Which Fuel versions does your problem concern? There were some big changes for Fuel from Pharo 4 to 5, e.g. MethodContext was renamed to Context. Depending on the objects you store however, you may be able to load the file simply by removing the version check in Fuel, as most things should be identical. Cheers, Max > On 27 Sep 2016, at 11:26, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> On 27 Sep 2016, at 11:21, Norbert Hartl <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Sven, >> >>> Am 27.09.2016 um 11:15 schrieb Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]>: >>> >>> PS2: Another really annoying problem is the following: he saved all his >>> (really important) scripts using Script Manager as a FUEL. Moving between >>> 4.0 and 5.0 FUEL stops working (version incompatibility) - this is really >>> not cool, why would a newer FUEL not be able to read older FUEL. He ended >>> up copying string data by opening the binary FUEL file in a text editor. >> >> it is like that from the beginning. I guess there was the fear keeping >> everything compatible would be a huge amount of work. But it is indeed an >> annoying thing. The usual way to deal with it is open pharo4 and materialize >> the fuel file then upgrade fuel to the version pharo5 uses and save again. >> >> Norbert > > Yeah, but this is silly: it goes against the principle of a persistence > format: to save data for future use. [ I knew this already, I never agreed > with this principle ]. > > Like I described in the email, after upgrading, we were unable to run the old > image - catch 22. > > >
