hi, I would say
get.pharo.org/30+vm <http://get.pharo.org/30+vm> or 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 ;) Esteban 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 >
