Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [jasspa] Alpha Test - A standalone windows executable

Expand Messages
  • Bryan Schofield
    Brilliant! It would be super brilliant if I could package my JASSPA_HOME the same way and bring it along as a single file.
    Message 1 of 11 , Nov 1, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Brilliant! It would be super brilliant if I could package my JASSPA_HOME the same way and bring it along as a single file. 

      On Oct 31, 2009, at 5:11 PM, Jon Green <jon@...> wrote:

       

      I've just posted an experimental Microsoft Windows me executable to the site here:

      http://www.jasspa. com/development/ jasspa-me- standalone- ms-win32- 20091017. zip

      The executable includes the macros built-in so it just runs wherever it is and
      does not need to be installed so good for a memory stick.

      You can actually get to the internal macros tree using the path "bfs://" (bfs
      being built-in file system), most likely will change this to "int://" or
      "rom://" but at the moment this is simply a prototype. (I know the dates are
      incorrect as well).

      More interestingly your can run M-x grep in here. You can also copy the whole
      tree out using the file browser to copy the directory. Any macros that are
      defined outside in the searchable jasspa directories will over-ride the
      built-in ones.

      Anyway, if you have time then give it a go and see how you like it. I need some
      Guinea pigs to test it! Should we ship executables such as this as standard?

      Regards
      Jon.

    • Jon Green
      ... You will be able to do this as well if you roll your own binary. My built-in file system builder is not quite ready for release yet and only works on
      Message 2 of 11 , Nov 1, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Bryan Schofield wrote:
        >
        >
        > Brilliant! It would be super brilliant if I could package my JASSPA_HOME
        > the same way and bring it along as a single file.

        You will be able to do this as well if you roll your own binary.

        My built-in file system builder is not quite ready for release yet and only
        works on Solaris so I need to port that to other platforms first and tidy it
        up. Once I have done this then I'll release it and you will be able to stuff it
        as you want. The builder simply recurses a directory tree and compresses and
        packs the files and directories into a file system and spits out a 'C' unsigned
        char array which is then compiled into the program. You can put what you want
        in there with as many directories as you want.

        Still checking running on different platforms at the moment.

        Regards
        Jon.

        >
        > On Oct 31, 2009, at 5:11 PM, Jon Green <jon@...
        > <mailto:jon@...>> wrote:
        >
        >>
        >>
        >> I've just posted an experimental Microsoft Windows me executable to
        >> the site here:
        >>
        >> <http://www.jasspa.com/development/jasspa-me-standalone-ms-win32-20091017.zip>http://www.jasspa.com/development/jasspa-me-standalone-ms-win32-20091017.zip
        >>
        >> The executable includes the macros built-in so it just runs wherever
        >> it is and
        >> does not need to be installed so good for a memory stick.
        >>
        >> You can actually get to the internal macros tree using the path
        >> "bfs://" (bfs
        >> being built-in file system), most likely will change this to "int://" or
        >> "rom://" but at the moment this is simply a prototype. (I know the
        >> dates are
        >> incorrect as well).
        >>
        >> More interestingly your can run M-x grep in here. You can also copy
        >> the whole
        >> tree out using the file browser to copy the directory. Any macros that
        >> are
        >> defined outside in the searchable jasspa directories will over-ride the
        >> built-in ones.
        >>
        >> Anyway, if you have time then give it a go and see how you like it. I
        >> need some
        >> Guinea pigs to test it! Should we ship executables such as this as
        >> standard?
        >>
        >> Regards
        >> Jon.
        >>
        >
        >
        >
      • Jon Green
        ... There are some Linux versions amongst others here: http://www.jasspa.com/development/me-standalone/ Regards Jon
        Message 3 of 11 , Nov 1, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          azynheira wrote:
          > Hi Jon
          > Good work!
          >
          > I had used standalone application by using StartKits in Tcl and this I would believe its the same idea concept?
          >
          > I makes ME (even) more appealing, just one .exe file and your private stuff and voila :-)
          >
          > Do you have this concept working for Linux as well ?
          >

          There are some Linux versions amongst others here:

          http://www.jasspa.com/development/me-standalone/

          Regards
          Jon
        • azynheira
          Hi Jon, Been playing with it! Looks nice .... :P Two points worth discussing: 1) I would see this stuff completely integrated into the regular build
          Message 4 of 11 , Nov 2, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi Jon,
            Been playing with it! Looks nice .... :P

            Two points worth discussing:
            1) I would see this stuff completely integrated into the "regular" build environment (I believe it's ongoing from the code I saw).

            2) Would be nice to have a system wide variable or a bit in the $system variable (Readonly) to indicate that the executable being ran is a standalone binary.

            Comments appreciated...

            Regards,
            Pedro



            --- In jasspa@yahoogroups.com, Jon Green <jon@...> wrote:
            >
            > azynheira wrote:
            > > Hi Jon
            > > Good work!
            > >
            > > I had used standalone application by using StartKits in Tcl and this I would believe its the same idea concept?
            > >
            > > I makes ME (even) more appealing, just one .exe file and your private stuff and voila :-)
            > >
            > > Do you have this concept working for Linux as well ?
            > >
            >
            > There are some Linux versions amongst others here:
            >
            > http://www.jasspa.com/development/me-standalone/
            >
            > Regards
            > Jon
            >
          • Jon Green
            ... It is just a prototype at the moment - the source is not even archived. There are makefiles updated for Linux/Freebsd/Darwin etc. Build as: build -t scw
            Message 5 of 11 , Nov 2, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              On Mon 02/11/09 11:59 AM , "azynheira" pedro.gomes@... sent:
              > Hi Jon,
              > Been playing with it! Looks nice .... :P
              >
              > Two points worth discussing:
              > 1) I would see this stuff completely integrated into the
              > "regular" build environment (I believe it's ongoing from the code
              > I saw).

              It is just a prototype at the moment - the source is not even archived.
              There are makefiles updated for Linux/Freebsd/Darwin etc. Build as:

              build -t scw
              build -t sc

              I did provide the source bundle.

              > 2) Would be nice to have a system wide variable or a bit in the $system
              > variable (Readonly) to indicate that the executable being ran is a
              > standalone binary.
              > Comments appreciated...

              I think that you should be able to do a @stat command on "bfs://" to test if it is present.
              Not tried this or even considered yet - possibly this will not work - that is why it is alpha.

              Regards
              Jon.


              >
              > Regards,
              > Pedro
              >
              >
              >
              > --- In jasspa
              > @yahoogroups.com, Jon Green <jon@...> wrote:>
              > > azynheira wrote:
              > > > Hi Jon
              > > > Good work!
              > > >
              > > > I had used standalone application by using
              > StartKits in Tcl and this I would believe its the same idea
              > concept?> >
              > > > I makes ME (even) more appealing, just one
              > .exe file and your private stuff and voila :-)> >
              > > > Do you have this concept working for Linux
              > as well ?> >
              > >
              > > There are some Linux versions amongst others
              > here:>
              > >
              > http://www.jasspa.com/development/me-standalone/>
              > > Regards
              > > Jon
              > >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > ------------------------------------
              >
              > __________________________________________________________________________
              > This is an unmoderated list, but new members are moderated to ensure that
              > there are no spam users. JASSPA is not responsible for the content of any material posted to this list.
              >
              > To un-subscribe, send a mail message to
              >
              > jasspa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              > or visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jasspa andmodify your account settings manually.
              >
              >
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              > Individual Email | Traditional
              >
              > jasspa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              >
              ---- Message sent via KC WebMail - http://webmail.mistral.net/
            • azynheira
              Hi Jon, Just some thoughts on the Win32 version: 1) I maybe trying to be perfectionist, but do you think that it could also be a good approach to put the bfs
              Message 6 of 11 , Nov 3, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi Jon,
                Just some thoughts on the Win32 version:
                1) I maybe trying to be perfectionist, but do you think that it could also be a good approach to put the bfs into a resource reference. This way one could replace it as wish.

                2) Another approach would be to append the bfs to the end of the executable and at run time the executable would search for the bfs at as trailing information append to the end of the exe file and load it.
                This way it would also allow some flexible plug&play bfs. If nothing was found, then it would be regular stripped me32.exe.

                What do you think about this?

                Regards,
                Pedro



                --- In jasspa@yahoogroups.com, Jon Green <jon@...> wrote:
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > On Mon 02/11/09 11:59 AM , "azynheira" pedro.gomes@... sent:
                > > Hi Jon,
                > > Been playing with it! Looks nice .... :P
                > >
                > > Two points worth discussing:
                > > 1) I would see this stuff completely integrated into the
                > > "regular" build environment (I believe it's ongoing from the code
                > > I saw).
                >
                > It is just a prototype at the moment - the source is not even archived.
                > There are makefiles updated for Linux/Freebsd/Darwin etc. Build as:
                >
                > build -t scw
                > build -t sc
                >
                > I did provide the source bundle.
                >
                > > 2) Would be nice to have a system wide variable or a bit in the $system
                > > variable (Readonly) to indicate that the executable being ran is a
                > > standalone binary.
                > > Comments appreciated...
                >
                > I think that you should be able to do a @stat command on "bfs://" to test if it is present.
                > Not tried this or even considered yet - possibly this will not work - that is why it is alpha.
                >
                > Regards
                > Jon.
                >
                >
                > >
                > > Regards,
                > > Pedro
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > --- In jasspa
                > > @yahoogroups.com, Jon Green <jon@> wrote:>
                > > > azynheira wrote:
                > > > > Hi Jon
                > > > > Good work!
                > > > >
                > > > > I had used standalone application by using
                > > StartKits in Tcl and this I would believe its the same idea
                > > concept?> >
                > > > > I makes ME (even) more appealing, just one
                > > .exe file and your private stuff and voila :-)> >
                > > > > Do you have this concept working for Linux
                > > as well ?> >
                > > >
                > > > There are some Linux versions amongst others
                > > here:>
                > > >
                > > http://www.jasspa.com/development/me-standalone/>
                > > > Regards
                > > > Jon
                > > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > ------------------------------------
                > >
                > > __________________________________________________________________________
                > > This is an unmoderated list, but new members are moderated to ensure that
                > > there are no spam users. JASSPA is not responsible for the content of any material posted to this list.
                > >
                > > To un-subscribe, send a mail message to
                > >
                > > jasspa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                > > or visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jasspa andmodify your account settings manually.
                > >
                > >
                > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                > >
                > > Individual Email | Traditional
                > >
                > > jasspa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                > >
                > >
                > ---- Message sent via KC WebMail - http://webmail.mistral.net/
                >
              • Jon Green
                ... Well done Pedro - top marks; this is exactly what we should do. This means that we do not need to do a build to change the macros and any Joe can easily
                Message 7 of 11 , Nov 3, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  azynheira wrote:
                  > Hi Jon, Just some thoughts on the Win32 version: 1) I maybe trying to be
                  > perfectionist, but do you think that it could also be a good approach to put
                  > the bfs into a resource reference. This way one could replace it as wish.
                  >
                  > 2) Another approach would be to append the bfs to the end of the executable
                  > and at run time the executable would search for the bfs at as trailing
                  > information append to the end of the exe file and load it. This way it would
                  > also allow some flexible plug&play bfs. If nothing was found, then it would
                  > be regular stripped me32.exe.
                  >

                  Well done Pedro - top marks; this is exactly what we should do.

                  This means that we do not need to do a build to change the macros and any Joe
                  can easily customize. Also the executable is standard, if there is anything on
                  the end then you can run it, if it is missing then run as normal. Also the
                  stuff on the end can be huge i.e. spelling dictionaries, the works! This also
                  satisfies Bryan's requirements of being able to load up with his own private files.

                  From what I have at the moment to this is just a little step - a small tweak
                  to the container format will mean I can access it from the bottom of the file
                  to find the root node entry point and then I have the root directory.

                  Well done - exactly why I alpha'ed it and what I should have thought of - guess
                  I was not thinking that far ahead just to proof of concept.

                  Thanks, I will pursue this path as the next revision.

                  Regards
                  Jon

                  > What do you think about this?
                  >
                  > Regards, Pedro
                  >
                  >
                • azynheira
                  Hi Jon, Nice ! :P One thing I forgot to refer yesterday was that it would be nice that the container is protected against corruption by appending to the
                  Message 8 of 11 , Nov 4, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hi Jon,
                    Nice ! :P

                    One thing I forgot to refer yesterday was that it would be nice that the container is protected against corruption by appending to the beginning headers of the container some md5sum of the whole "cake", that would then be checked at startup just to be sure that we dont have "bad" contents inside.

                    Just some more cents ... :-)

                    Pedro

                    --- In jasspa@yahoogroups.com, Jon Green <jon@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > azynheira wrote:
                    > > Hi Jon, Just some thoughts on the Win32 version: 1) I maybe trying to be
                    > > perfectionist, but do you think that it could also be a good approach to put
                    > > the bfs into a resource reference. This way one could replace it as wish.
                    > >
                    > > 2) Another approach would be to append the bfs to the end of the executable
                    > > and at run time the executable would search for the bfs at as trailing
                    > > information append to the end of the exe file and load it. This way it would
                    > > also allow some flexible plug&play bfs. If nothing was found, then it would
                    > > be regular stripped me32.exe.
                    > >
                    >
                    > Well done Pedro - top marks; this is exactly what we should do.
                    >
                    > This means that we do not need to do a build to change the macros and any Joe
                    > can easily customize. Also the executable is standard, if there is anything on
                    > the end then you can run it, if it is missing then run as normal. Also the
                    > stuff on the end can be huge i.e. spelling dictionaries, the works! This also
                    > satisfies Bryan's requirements of being able to load up with his own private files.
                    >
                    > From what I have at the moment to this is just a little step - a small tweak
                    > to the container format will mean I can access it from the bottom of the file
                    > to find the root node entry point and then I have the root directory.
                    >
                    > Well done - exactly why I alpha'ed it and what I should have thought of - guess
                    > I was not thinking that far ahead just to proof of concept.
                    >
                    > Thanks, I will pursue this path as the next revision.
                    >
                    > Regards
                    > Jon
                    >
                    > > What do you think about this?
                    > >
                    > > Regards, Pedro
                    > >
                    > >
                    >
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.