2016-05-25 8:47 GMT+02:00 stepharo <[email protected]>:

> hi nicolai
>
>
> let me know when this is ready to integrate.
>
> We are trying to purge the queue but sometimes I end up redoing the
> changes in fast mode.
>

Thanks, fix for 17696 should work now (monkey is checking).


>
> Stef
>
> Le 25/5/16 à 00:06, Nicolai Hess a écrit :
>
>
>
> 2016-05-24 23:51 GMT+02:00 Henrik Nergaard <[email protected]>:
>
>> When trying to load the Slice for 17696 from  pharo60Inbox I get:
>> “MessageNotUnderstood: receiver of "dependencies" is nil” when it tries to
>> load AST-FFI-Pharo50Compatibility.
>>
>>
>>
>> I think you need to reset the package cache/folder?
>>
>> You might also I need to do the slice again (without loading the
>> previous), and ensure that the author set when uploading the slice is not
>> the same as similar slices in the repo so it will not create dependencies
>> of it ( ie before creating the slice do: “Author fullname: ‘_NicolaiHess’
>>
>
> Thanks, I think cleaning the package cache folder did the trick. It seems
> to work now.
>
>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Henrik
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Pharo-dev [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf
>> Of *Nicolai Hess
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 24, 2016 11:38 PM
>> *To:* Pharo Development List < <[email protected]>
>> [email protected]>
>> *Subject:* [Pharo-dev] slice/merge conflict with package
>> AST-FFI-Pharo50Compatibility
>>
>>
>>
>> I need help with issues
>> 17696
>> <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/17696/RBParser-should-not-allow-variable-names-for-pragma-arguments>
>> RBParser should not allow variable names for pragma arguments
>> 17994
>> <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/17994/RBParserNode-allowed-primitive-pragma-definition-can-not-compile>
>> RBParserNode: allowed primitive pragma definition can not compile
>>
>> for both issues I created a slice that will modify methods from package
>> AST-FFI-Pharo50Compatibility, but merging this slices shows a merge
>> conflict.
>>
>> I don't know what is wrong or how I could solve this.
>>
>> any help appreciated.
>>
>> nicolai
>>
>
>
>

Reply via email to