On 02.02.2010, at 09:22, Amos Blanton wrote: > Thanks Bert - I found that as well that after digging a little more after my > last message. > So - the Debian squeak-vm Bert mentioned seems to work well with Scratch. A > few observations: > > 1. The vm now wants plugin filenames to begin with so., so we'd have to do > some minor changes in our package to rename the Scratch and Camera plugins.
I think it should still find plugins named differently (but I haven't looked at the code right now). > 2. The pulse plugin that ships with the vm has spotty delayed / interrupted > playback. Recording has same problem as the version of the pulse plugin we > are currently using. When I fell back to our current release version of the > pulse plugin, playback was fine and recording has the same problems as > experienced earlier (same behavior as with bundled VM). > > There is also a gstreamer (sound?) plugin, but it doesn't follow the same > format as the others, so I couldn't figure out how test it. > > 3. The VM binary and plugins are installed in a subdirectory named after the > squeak version: /usr/lib/squeak/3.11.3-2147/squeakvm > > There doesn't seem to be a way to refer to the VM without knowing the whole > path. Is this so a dependent piece of software can insist on a particular > version of the VM? Scratch would depend only on /usr/bin/squeak > To make things work I had to copy the Scratch plugin and CameraPlugin to the > same subdirectory. Of course, if Scratch and the vm are separate packages in > Ubuntu, we won't be able to do this when the vm gets updated after Scratch > has been installed. So now I think I see why Bert suggested we get the > ScratchPlugin (and the CameraPlugin) into the squeak package. That should be discussed with the squeak-vm maintainer. - Bert - > > My apologies if the answers to some of these questions are obvious - I'm > rather new to this process. > > -Amos > > On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Bert Freudenberg <[email protected]> > wrote: > On 02.02.2010, at 07:37, Amos Blanton wrote: >> Hi John, >> >> Here are a few reasons to lean towards using the vm from the repositories. >> Mako may have more. >> >> 1. Architecture independence - we could support more architectures than >> i386. >> 2. We can inherit improvements to sound plugins, etc. I've seen mention of a >> gstreamer plugin for Squeak that I'd love to try out to see if it might >> solve our recording problems. >> 3. The Ubuntu MOTU's (gatekeepers to the multi-verse repository we want to >> get into) will be more likely to accept the Scratch package because it >> conforms to recommended practices. Bundling your own VM is seen as bad form. >> 4. Bugs in the VM will be filed against the VM, and not Scratch. >> >> Also, Bert mentioned: >> José just submitted the 3.11.3 squeak-vm to Debian: >> >> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-squeak-devel/2010-January/000023.html >> >> I think that should trickle down to Ubuntu in time, though I don't know the >> actual process. >> Mako - perhaps you know how easy / difficult this process is? >> >> It'd be great if I could get a binary of the new VM to test with Scratch on >> Ubuntu. Where to find completed / built package or this latest source isn't >> clear to me. >> >> Amos > > See "download" at > http://packages.debian.org/sid/squeak-vm > > > - Bert - > > >> >> 2010/2/2 John Maloney <[email protected]> >> Hi, Amos. >> >> >> On Feb 1, 2010, at 6:04 PM, Bert Freudenberg wrote: >> So we'd like to submit a package to be included in it, ready or not, before >> that date. (We can hopefully submit fixes after that date, but the process >> gets trickier). Mako has agreed to sponsor it. He suggested, however, that >> we submit a version of the package that depends on the squeak-vm in the >> ubuntu repositories (1.3.9.8-3ubuntu3)instead of including its own VM (3.10 >> - 4 beta #1 dated Feb. 2009), which is how we've done it so far. >> >> Even the latest VM does not include the Scratch-specific plugins yet. I >> started pushing for this a while ago but haven't spend much time myself on >> it. Would be good if you Scratch folks would work with the Squeak VM >> developers and packagers more closely. >> >> It's easy to switch to using the Squeak-vm from the ubuntu repositories, but >> it introduces a new bug when Scratch is run under Compiz. It causes the >> Scratch cat and other sprites to be "see through" ( see attached image ) >> Note that it's possible to see text on windows underneath the Scratch window >> through the representations of the icons - but not clearly. Kind of an >> interesting bug! >> >> I fixed that back in 2008. Was in the 3.10.4 release. >> >> Hmm -- Bert's fix must have been after the 3.10 - 4 beta version that's in >> the current Ubuntu package. >> >> It doesn't look like that package is being actively maintained. If it isn't, >> I don't think it makes sense for Scratch to depend on it. >> >> But in any case, I'd rather continue to bundle our own VM with Scratch. >> There are pros and cons, of course, but if we bundle our own Squeak VM then >> we are not going to be surprised by having a new VM release break Scratch. >> And since Scratch is based on a version of Squeak that's about 10 years old, >> we don't need the very latest VM features. >> >> -- John >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~scratch Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~scratch More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
