+1

Sent from my iPhone
Encrypted email at jgpfers...@protonmail.com

> On Mar 7, 2018, at 07:14, stefano franchi <stefano.fran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Dear Marcus,
> 
> thanks for the detailed answer. 
> 
> Let me say that my question did not in any ways imply that Pharo should 
> assume the burden of maintaining current images and VMs on old machines. My 
> goal was (is) simply to find out whether it was possible  to repurpose a 
> number old machines I have laying around by installing *old* versions of 
> Pharo. And I now have a positive answer, having installed vm30 and verified 
> that it works perfectly. 
> 
> In fact, I think adding a few lines to the website listing the last supported 
> version for the major MacOs releases would be a valuable addition and nicely 
> complement your commendable policy of keeping everything.
> 
> All the best,
> 
> Stefano
> 
> 
>> On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 1:47 AM, Marcus Denker <marcus.den...@inria.fr> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On 5 Mar 2018, at 20:16, stefano franchi <stefano.fran...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 11:28 AM, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.s...@gmail.com> 
>>> wrote:
>>>> Did you check
>>>> 
>>>> http://get.pharo.org
>>>> 
>>>> because we keep everything.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Apologies for not having stated my question more precisely. Indeed, I 
>>> started from 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 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/  
>> 
>> 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
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> __________________________________________________
> Stefano Franchi
> 
> stefano.fran...@gmail.com
> http://stefano.cleinias.org

Reply via email to