I would say 

get.pharo.org/30+vm <http://get.pharo.org/30+vm> 


get.pharo.org/20+vm <http://get.pharo.org/30+vm> 

one of both should work. 
there is also a chance that 

get.pharo.org/40+vm <http://get.pharo.org/30+vm> 

… will work, but you need to try it ;)


ps: but as Marcus say, it will be an older image and an older VM. Still very 
usable (as it *was* usable at the time), but not the fresh stuff :)

> On 6 Mar 2018, at 08:47, Marcus Denker <marcus.den...@inria.fr> wrote:
>> On 5 Mar 2018, at 20:16, stefano franchi <stefano.fran...@gmail.com 
>> <mailto:stefano.fran...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 11:28 AM, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.s...@gmail.com 
>> <mailto:stepharo.s...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> Did you check
>> http://get.pharo.org <http://get.pharo.org/>
>> because we keep everything.
>> Apologies for not having stated my question more precisely. Indeed, I 
>> started from get.pharo.org <http://get.pharo.org/>, but the zeroconf script 
>> did not guess right. The app it downloaded crashes at startup. Then I saw 
>> the *long* list of versions available and had no idea where to begin. So my 
>> real question is:
>> Does anyone know which among the many VMs available on  http://get.pharo.org 
>> <http://get.pharo.org/> would work on a MacOs Powerbook Pro running 10.6.9? 
>> It was the latest 32 bit only machine Apple made, based on the Intel Core 
>> Duo (NOT the Intel  Core 2 Duo that came out a few months later).
> you could look for old VMs and downloads here: http://files.pharo.org/ 
> <http://files.pharo.org/>  
> But it is quite hard to for us (with our limited man power) to support old 
> machines forever… e.g the vm from that time should run,
> but at some point the VM gets improved and newer images require a newer VM as 
> we want to actually use the features that
> new VMs provide.
> Keeping everything compatible in all possible directions (old images on new 
> VMs, new image on old VMs …) puts quite some 
> constraints on what you can do in future… an maintaining new VMs for all 
> possible old MacOS versions could soon just 
> use up all our manpower.
> So this is not a simple problem to solve. Even very financially capable 
> projects (like Mozilla) can not support old MacOS
> versions. And they spend 150K per *month* just on CI infrastructure… imagine 
> if they decide to not support anything older
> then MaOS 10.9… can we? should we?
> There are things to do on this front, but if I would spend effort the first 
> thing I would work on is running *old* images on
> *new* VMs and explore what kind of abstraction would be needed to to that 
> nicely and in a way that it can be maintained
> and in a way that all the needed code ( e.g. translation byte code from old 
> to new) would be not part of the VM but 
> part of the image.
> Making sure to run *current* images on old Machines can only be done by 
> backporting the current VM to the old OS.
> This should be not that hard, worst case is that you need to combine some old 
> OS related code with the rest of the new VM,
> but that should not be much.
> But one question: Considering what developer time costs… I am quite sure that 
> it is cheaper to just buy a current Mac.
>       Marcus

Reply via email to