Linker Docu file for Linux

[a.mcintosh]

I recently downloaded the Ubuntu 16.04 LTS / 18.04 LTS deb file from
https://blackbox.oberon.org/unstable/ma ... 4_i386.deb
as found on https://blackbox.oberon.org/download

I want to make an experimental modification to Files and re-link the system. In particular, I want to be able to change Files.docuType, so I will either mark it as changeable, or introduce a new procedure to set it.

I found some commands at the end of Dev2Linker1, and I was able to inspect the loaded modules window and formulate a command that did result in a working linked code.

Dev2Linker1.LinkElf Linux BlackBox1 := Kernel$+ Files HostFiles HostGnome StdLoader ~ 105,268 (matches distribution, and starts)

I thought it might help to put move the examples to Docu/Linker1.odc

[Ivan Denisov]

Thank you for the feedback!

Traditionally build instructions in
Dev/Docu/Build-Tool.odc

Dev2 subsystem need documentation and also it does not make import check well...
If somebody wants to improve it, you are very welcome!

[a.mcintosh]

Thank you. I forgot to look at Dev Build-Tool.

At the moment, I am working with
origin git@github.com:bbcb/bbcp.git
branch ConvChoice
commit 7ea04a

I have produced my own repository that clones into an empty User/Work/Project/Sandbox/Second shadow environment with the same sub-directory structure as the branch above. I find myself facing many questions.

1. A simple one is, has the community settled on a coherent name for this directory? I notice in the shell scripts it is referred to by ${sd} so I suppose second directory is in use. With the introduction of git, my work practice will probably evolve so that it makes sense to call this a project directory. I am not advocating one name over another, but I do want any documentation that I write to fit the community consensus. At the moment I am using the code name Myproject.git

2. Does it make any sense for me to have a git server for very early work that is not ready to publish, but nonetheless I might want a few others to look at? I already have this repository operating, I am working on "user registration & login" issues.

3. N.b., I have a history of doing experimental changes deep in the system, then J Templ cautions me to proceed cautiously.

4. TL,DR; I moved Dev2Linker1 output to ../bin. Given a choice of a) marking HostFiles.File.loc for export, Hardwiring Dev2LnkChmod to know about this change, or moving Dev2LnkChmod.Chmod to HostFiles.Chmod, which make the most sense to the community?

[adimetrius]

1. {sd} stands for secondary dir, as opposed to primary dir. Both can bee seen in run-dev0 and bbcb scripts. (I'll mention that in the oberoncore.ru forum, we have discussed the possibility of a three-level directory structure: primary (with BB as is shipped), secondary (with one's personal versions of standard modules; like if you amend smth in TextViews, you'd keep the amended module in the secondary dir) and, well, working; the discussion is open, there's no resolution and no trial implementation).
2. What are the intriguing changes you're trying out in this sandbox?
4. It's hard to understand the question without its context. What are the procedures you're considering changing? What's the rationale - why do you want to change output to ../bin?

[Josef Templ]

Having 3 directory levels would IMHO be better than just the 2 we have now.
The question then arises if it could be N as a generalization and in particular if
that makes a big difference in terms of implementation effort?