"Tom Melly" <tom### [at] tomandlucouk> wrote in message news:406c4333$1@news.povray.org...
> "Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message news:406c4225@news.povray.org...
> > Tom Melly <tom### [at] tomandlucouk> wrote:
> > > Ah - reading between the lines here, I take it that no pure source still
> exists
> > > for beta 2? That seems, well, odd, but at least explains things.
> >
> >   What do you mean "pure source"?
>
> I mean the source (all req. files) that was compiled to beta 2. You seem to
> imply that re-compiling beta 2 (with a new expiry date) is not possible, since
> the source files required for that no longer exist in the same state. Or have I
> misunderstood?

We use a version control system that allows us to re-create any released version
of POV-Ray (alpha, beta or official) since the first private 3.5 alpha.

However for me, for example, to re-created beta 2, would require me to check in
all files which I currently have checked out, then sync my workstation to the
3.6.beta.2 label (+ the connection to the server happens to be via a modem), THEN
to change the date, THEN re-build the EXE in 'profile generation' mode with the
ICL compiler (as the current profile data I would have is not relevent to the old
code), THEN run the resulting EXE on the benchmark and a few dozen other selected
source files (normally I run it on the entire portfolio and insert menu as well),
THEN re-compile the EXE after telling the compiler to use the generated profile
data from those runs, THEN upload it to the website and update the HTML, THEN
re-sync my workstation to the head revisions (assuming I was working on head in
the first place) and resume where I left off.

So yes, I can re-create it. But it's not worth the effort given that I could
better use that time in getting beta 3 done, and beta testers already know that
it will expire and can live without it in the meantime.

-- Chris

Post a reply to this message