Le 23/03/2018 à 21:52, Eliot Miranda a écrit :
> Hi Damien,
>
> Indeed the image is corrupt at start-up.  See below.
>  
>
> Right.  This VM is prior to the bug fixes in VMMaker.oscog-eem.2320:
>
> Spur:
> Fix a bad bug in SpurPlnningCompactor.
>  unmarkObjectsFromFirstFreeObject, used when the compactor requires more
> than one pass due to insufficient savedFirstFieldsSpace, expects the
> corpse of a moved object to be unmarked, but
> copyAndUnmarkObject:to:bytes:firstField: only unmarked the target. 
> Unmarking the corpse before the copy unmarks both.  This fixes a crash
> with ReleaseBuilder class>>saveAsNewRelease when non-use of cacheDuring:
> creates lots of files, enough to push the system into the multi-pass regime.
>
>
> Pharo urgently needs to upgrade the VM to one more up to date than 2017
> 08 27 (in fact more up-to-date than opensmalltalk/vm commit
> 0fe1e1ea108e53501a0e728736048062c83a66ce, Fri Jan 19 13:17:57 2018
> -0800).  The bug that VMMaker.oscog-eem.2320 fixes can result in image
> corruption in large images, and can occur (as it has here) at start-up,
> causing one's work to be irretrievably lost.
>  

Hi Eliot,

I think that there is a lot of people who would like to get a newer
stable vm for Pharo 6.1 and 7. The problem is that it is hard to know
which VM are stable enough to be promoted as stable.

Some weeks ago Esteban tried to promote a VM as stable and he had to
revert it the same day because a regression occurred in the VM.

If you're able to tell us which vms are stable in those present at
http://files.pharo.org/vm/pharo-spur32/ and
http://files.pharo.org/vm/pharo-spur64/ it would be a great help.

Even better would be for the pharo community to have a way to know which
vms are stable or not without having to ask you.

Have a nice day.

>
> --
> _,,,^..^,,,_
> best, Eliot
--
Cyril Ferlicot
https://ferlicot.fr