World: r3wp
[!REBOL2 Releases] Discuss 2.x releases
older newer | first last |
GrahamC 2-Jan-2011 [2190] | Past predictions of future development are consistently wrong .. you should now that by now |
BrianH 2-Jan-2011 [2191] | Yup, that too. Especially when they are based on what happened in the past. |
nve 2-Jan-2011 [2192] | As R3 has no official release still in alpha mode and because there's a big shift between R2 and R3, professionnals user's of REBOL really need to have a plan for R2 support, R2 bug fixes, R2 enhancement... Is there's something to migrate script written in R2 to script in R3 ? |
BrianH 2-Jan-2011 [2193x2] | Not yet, as R3 is a bit of a moving target. Most R2 code will run in R3 if it doesn't use any GUI or port code. Part of the migration strategy has been the R2/Forward stuff, which allows you to write code in a more R3-like way in R2. Plus, we are backporting some of the native enhancements that are additive rather than changing, like SELECT on objects. |
We have a few plans for R2 enhancement, mostly the View installer on Windows, but for the most part we are just backporting enhancements from R3 whenever we can and they are backwards compatible. Bug fixes and additions, no big changes, that is the policy. R2 is in backwards-compatibility mode as a rule. | |
RobertS 2-Jan-2011 [2195] | On my windows XP SP3 the VIEW is failing as invalid exe; the CORE is fine; these are both numbered 3.1 for 2.7.8 and no change with fresh download; the inspected exe is not garbage but kicks this error whether in open cmd session console or fired by explorer - I did not try under Cygwin or MSys yet ... |
Oldes 2-Jan-2011 [2196] | works here with XP SP3 |
BrianH 2-Jan-2011 [2197] | Here on XP SP3 all of the exes, including View, Core and the SDK programs all work. Have you tried redownloading and reextracting? Are there other system settings or software that you have that might affect this? Which antimalware or firewall apps are you using? |
Demitri 2-Jan-2011 [2198] | I can't find the 2.7.8 download - anyone have a link - windows here. |
BrianH 2-Jan-2011 [2199] | Here is the main link, to be simple for everyone: http://www.rebol.com/downloads/v278/ |
Demitri 2-Jan-2011 [2200] | Thanks Brian. |
RobertS 3-Jan-2011 [2201] | Yes, yes .. so to try to get to the bottom of this - what shoud the true byte count of that VIEW exe be, please ? thanks |
Oldes 3-Jan-2011 [2202x5] | >> checksum/method read/binary %rebol-view-278-3-1.exe 'md5 == #{AA2F4FD92FE00DE85428F39A6E0E9CFD} |
hm.. interesting... >> checksum/method bin: read/binary http://www.rebol.com/downloads/v278/rebol-core-278-3-1.exe 'md5 == #{517DBC6EBEEF92B98515DD38AA590BAF} | |
ech.. core != view | |
>> checksum/method bin: read/binary http://www.rebol.com/downloads/v278/rebol-view-278-3-1.exe 'md5 == #{AA2F4FD92FE00DE85428F39A6E0E9CFD} | |
write/binary %r278.exe bin call/shell "r278.exe" ;-) | |
RobertS 3-Jan-2011 [2207x2] | one indicator: IE 8 (which is not my default now since I moved to K-mleon) runs VIEW 2.7.8 as a right-click option using RUN - but download with IE8 and run from Explorer file view correctly triggers a request to authorize due to no "valid" digital signature for MS - yet this MS alert fails to trigger when run after download using K-meleon browser (yet no issue after K-meleon downloads CORE 2.7.8 ) |
this is a K-Meleon Windows browser gift - maybe sometimes smaller/faster is not better ... KMeleon is writing to a USB ext drive and IE8 is writing to an internal HD ... sometimes KM is writing the larger VIEW exe intact, sometimes not. This may account for some recent "bad" ZIP's from my x-plane Flightsim community. Yuch. Most of those x-p guys always zip up all their Win indexing .Thumb or hidden Mac files - and sometimes they have accumulated both from working on a Win "airplane" on their Mac. So I am used to annoying ZIP's for that hobby ... but this is TOO annoying. | |
BrianH 3-Jan-2011 [2209x3] | The request-to-authorize thing is managed by an extended attribute in one of the other forks of the file on NTFS, and not on FAT. Have you tried Chrome or Firefox? |
Have you tried downloading the zip file containing the exe instead of the exe directly? http://www.rebol.com/downloads/v278/rebol-view-278-3-1.zip | |
Looks like we have OSX Intel and Linux Libc6 builds now. | |
Kaj 3-Jan-2011 [2212] | Cool |
Andreas 3-Jan-2011 [2213] | Woohoo, also looks like the /View Linux libc6 builds (4-2) are no longer broken. |
GrahamC 3-Jan-2011 [2214] | It would be good if 'ajoin were present |
BrianH 3-Jan-2011 [2215] | It has been since 2.7.7. |
GrahamC 3-Jan-2011 [2216] | Ahh.. well, one of these days I shall upgrade from 2.7.6 |
Ashley 3-Jan-2011 [2217] | 2.7.8.2.5 seems to start a lot faster (than 2.7.7.2.5). |
Anton 4-Jan-2011 [2218] | RobertS, yes, it's a good idea to check what filesystem is on your USB drive. |
Kaj 4-Jan-2011 [2219] | I find the technical arguments for leaving out /Library very hard to believe. I suspect this is a case of RT pulling a Microsoft, by making design decisions subordinate to business considerations |
BrianH 4-Jan-2011 [2220] | 2.7.8 turned out to have to be a minimal release, due to outside constraints. That means it's time to talk about 2.7.9. |
Kaj 4-Jan-2011 [2221] | In this case, we're really still talking about 2.7.7 |
BrianH 4-Jan-2011 [2222] | The code in R2 that implements those business constraints is still code, so changing stuff still takes work. |
Dockimbel 4-Jan-2011 [2223] | Pity that the 2.7.8 roadmap wasn't updated: http://www.rebol.com/docs/changes-2-7.html |
BrianH 4-Jan-2011 [2224x2] | 2.7.7 also turned out to have to be a minimal release at the time. It's hard to budget time for major native changes in R2, partly due to business constraints (who is paying for this work? noone that I know of, and adding Library to Core removes a revenue source without replacing it with another), and partly due to the nature of the codebase itself. |
Yes, Doc, I have been requesting that too. And Carl (belatedly) said to hold off on using or announcing the SDK (don't know why). | |
Kaj 4-Jan-2011 [2226] | I repeat: I find the technical arguments very hard to believe |
BrianH 4-Jan-2011 [2227] | That's your perogative, since you haven't seen the code, and haven't discussed the code with Carl. |
Kaj 4-Jan-2011 [2228x2] | I'm not going to defend RT against trolls anymore, because they are proven right this way |
I don't need to see the code, because it's very simple: there's Pro, and you only have to disable some parts of it | |
BrianH 4-Jan-2011 [2230] | I agree. |
Andreas 4-Jan-2011 [2231] | rebview278 still fails when run in a non-X environment. So `Change "bad face in screen pane" issue on non-X env boot` was not done. |
Kaj 4-Jan-2011 [2232] | That seemed to be a business consideration a year ago, so I was hoping it carried some weight |
BrianH 4-Jan-2011 [2233] | Andreas, the changes doc wasn't updated yet. Most of the native changes that didn't have checkmarks next to them weren't done. This was a minimal release, so some stuff got put off to 2.7.9. Give me a moment and I will try to list the changes in that list that were in this release. |
Andreas 4-Jan-2011 [2234] | Nevermind. Prompted by Kaj mentioning it previously, I was just checking if this was fixed in 2.7.8 and found it it wasn't. |
Oldes 4-Jan-2011 [2235] | Instead of access-os there are also new natives list-env and set-env |
Pekr 4-Jan-2011 [2236x2] | BrianH: what are you talking about? Wasn't /shell and /library released for the /Core for free already? |
talking any "revenue" in regards to RT and business, is quite funny imo ... | |
Kaj 4-Jan-2011 [2238] | Not Library |
Pekr 4-Jan-2011 [2239] | yes, it was IIRC ... |
older newer | first last |