I submitted a request to www.debian.org and asked them to look into generating a
povray 3.1 package for me.  I want to keep the machines all similar if possible.

We'll see what happens.

- Steve

Ken wrote:

> Steve Webb wrote:
> >
> > Not yet, only 3.0 code so-far.  Sorry.
> >
> > If I get enough requests for 3.1, I suppose I'll switch over to it.
> >
> > What's the big deal with 3.1?  I've not kept up with the FAQ.
> >
> > - Steve
>
> A lot of bug fixes and several new features that more than recommend themselves.
> Probably one of the nicest new features for v3.1 is macros.
>
> --
> Ken Tyler -  1300+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
> http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/

Post a reply to this message

> Yea, I thought of that, but that would allow people to render rediculuously
> large pictures that my machines may net be able to support (memory

There must be some way to impose restrictions on it, isn't there?

--
Homepage: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
___     ______________________________
 | \     |_       <dav### [at] faricynet>
 |_/avid |ontaine      <ICQ 55354965>

Post a reply to this message

Hmmm.  Well, I suppose so.  What's wrong with the current selection of
resolutions?  I have: 320x240, 640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x1024,
1600x1200.  Are there others that I missed?

- Steve

David Fontaine wrote:

> > Yea, I thought of that, but that would allow people to render rediculuously
> > large pictures that my machines may net be able to support (memory
>
> There must be some way to impose restrictions on it, isn't there?
>
> --
> Homepage: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
> ___     ______________________________
>  | \     |_       <dav### [at] faricynet>
>  |_/avid |ontaine      <ICQ 55354965>

Post a reply to this message

Steve Webb <swe### [at] rapucaredu> wrote:
: Ok, I changed it a bit.  Let me know if it is still annoying.

  Yes, the coloring is much better now.
  Could you please remove the blinking in the red text? It's very hard to
read when it's visible only 50% of the time.

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

On the other hand, 3.0 is much more safer than 3.1. In the latter we have
the file-I/O, which is a potential risk.
  Just think about someone opening your .login and putting some nasty
commands there...

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> wrote:
: You should replace the "select resolution" thing with an edit box where
: the user can specify command-line options and set their own aliasing and
: stuff.

  So that someone could type a nasty pre-scene-command there?

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

Steven Webb <ste### [at] badcheesecom> wrote:
>
> Hmmm.  Well, I suppose so.  What's wrong with the current selection of
> resolutions?  I have: 320x240, 640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x1024,
> 1600x1200.  Are there others that I missed?

What if someone wanted to do a "widescreen" picture at, say, 800x450?
Or a square image, or one taller than it is wide?  I've frequently used
formats which didn't fit the usual 4/3 screen resolutions.

-- 
Jeff Lee         shi### [at] gatenet         http://www.gate.net/~shipbrk/

Post a reply to this message

> Hmmm.  Well, I suppose so.  What's wrong with the current selection of
> resolutions?  I have: 320x240, 640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x1024,
> 1600x1200.  Are there others that I missed?

Different ratios, different AA settings, different quality settings...

--
Homepage: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
___     ______________________________
 | \     |_       <dav### [at] faricynet>
 |_/avid |ontaine      <ICQ 55354965>

Post a reply to this message

Nieminen Juha wrote in message <38720ccb@news.povray.org>...
>David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> wrote:
>: You should replace the "select resolution" thing with an edit box where
>: the user can specify command-line options and set their own aliasing and
>: stuff.
>
>  So that someone could type a nasty pre-scene-command there?
>


You can always filter the command line to remove shellout commands and
outrageous resolutions.

Mark

Post a reply to this message

Hmm.

I think that when I get the 3.1 support working, I'll add more features and
other resolutions.

- Steve

Mark Wagner wrote:

> Nieminen Juha wrote in message <38720ccb@news.povray.org>...
> >David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> wrote:
> >: You should replace the "select resolution" thing with an edit box where
> >: the user can specify command-line options and set their own aliasing and
> >: stuff.
> >
> >  So that someone could type a nasty pre-scene-command there?
> >
>
> You can always filter the command line to remove shellout commands and
> outrageous resolutions.
>
> Mark

-- (swe### [at] rapucaredu or http://www.rap.ucar.edu/staff/swebb)

Post a reply to this message