clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 09.11.2011 23:00, schrieb jhu:
> > It would be helpful if the source was self contained like the 3.6 source with
> > the needed libraries distributed also. Makes compiling a lot less of a hassle.
>
> Work is currently underway to achieve this for the Windows distrubution
> for Visual Studio 2010, with promising success; porting that to the
> projects for VS 2005 (and also VS 2008, which is pretty similar in this
> regard) should also be quite straightforward - but will take some time
> nonetheless, and we're still looking for a volunteer to do the same for
> the Unix distribution.

I guess I could volunteer. Integrate boost, zlib, jpeg, tiff, and png into the
source then?

Post a reply to this message

BTW, to OP, I have statically compiled 64-bit x86-64 executables for Linux if
you're interested. Just tell me what CPU you have.

Post a reply to this message

High!

On 09.11.2011 23:45, Jim Henderson wrote:

> Fair enough, but a Google search does in fact turn up a reasonable
> tutorial on compiling on Linux.
>
> One does have to be willing to use the tools available instead of just
> declaring "I won't use Google" (which is the way I read his "Google is
> not my friend" comment).

Too often in the past I had experienced Google swamping me with useless 
links leading only to useless info junk instead of showing me viable 
ways to proceed... all that "Buy XXXXX now!" stuff, when searching for 
whatever! Google sucks!

See you in Khyberspace!

Yadgar

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 05:29:27 +0100, Jörg 'Yadgar' Bleimann wrote:

> Too often in the past I had experienced Google swamping me with useless
> links leading only to useless info junk instead of showing me viable
> ways to proceed... all that "Buy XXXXX now!" stuff, when searching for
> whatever! Google sucks!

I generally don't have that problem, but I have ad blockers installed, so 
I don't see the adwords ads.

But I also have generally good luck in finding what I'm looking for using 
Google.  But if you don't want to use Google, that's fine, just insert a 
different search engine. :)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Hi(gh)!

On 10.11.2011 06:35, Jim Henderson wrote:

> But I also have generally good luck in finding what I'm looking for using
> Google.  But if you don't want to use Google, that's fine, just insert a
> different search engine. :)

I'm generally skeptical of human knowledge organized by computers - they 
are much too easily manipulated by clever web programmers, as no 
present-day search engine really is able to detect the relevance of a 
HTML text and thus to discern between phony catchword dumps (also mostly 
automatically generated these days!) and information that really matters!

But who wants to pay human web librarians and archivists? Internet is 
cheap, fast - and mostly worthless!

See you in Khyberspace!

Yadgar

Post a reply to this message

Am 10.11.2011 02:16, schrieb jhu:
> clipka<ano### [at] anonymousorg>  wrote:
>> Am 09.11.2011 23:00, schrieb jhu:
>>> It would be helpful if the source was self contained like the 3.6 source with
>>> the needed libraries distributed also. Makes compiling a lot less of a hassle.
>>
>> Work is currently underway to achieve this for the Windows distrubution
>> for Visual Studio 2010, with promising success; porting that to the
>> projects for VS 2005 (and also VS 2008, which is pretty similar in this
>> regard) should also be quite straightforward - but will take some time
>> nonetheless, and we're still looking for a volunteer to do the same for
>> the Unix distribution.
>
> I guess I could volunteer. Integrate boost, zlib, jpeg, tiff, and png into the
> source then?

Plus openEXR. Yes, that would be the job. Boost would be limited to 
boost_thread and boost_date_time; aside from those, we currently only 
use boost header-only libraries.

zlib, jpeg, tiff and png libraries are already in the source tree (we 
just don't currently distribute them in the Linux version); boost and 
openEXR will be added to the code repository soon.

Post a reply to this message

clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:

>
> Plus openEXR. Yes, that would be the job. Boost would be limited to
> boost_thread and boost_date_time; aside from those, we currently only
> use boost header-only libraries.
>
> zlib, jpeg, tiff and png libraries are already in the source tree (we
> just don't currently distribute them in the Linux version); boost and
> openEXR will be added to the code repository soon.

So just put relevant source and respective directories into main source tree,
modify some scripts then? Sounds within my skill level.

Post a reply to this message

Am 10.11.2011 19:45, schrieb jhu:
> clipka<ano### [at] anonymousorg>  wrote:
>
>>
>> Plus openEXR. Yes, that would be the job. Boost would be limited to
>> boost_thread and boost_date_time; aside from those, we currently only
>> use boost header-only libraries.
>>
>> zlib, jpeg, tiff and png libraries are already in the source tree (we
>> just don't currently distribute them in the Linux version); boost and
>> openEXR will be added to the code repository soon.
>
> So just put relevant source and respective directories into main source tree,
> modify some scripts then? Sounds within my skill level.

I guess we'd love to go for a makefile-based solution, rather than the 
BJam build tool the boost library comes with.

It would probably also be nice to have an option to link against already 
installed versions of the libraries instead.

I guess to pick up that glove you should contact Chris Cason. I'm sure 
your help will be appreciated.

Post a reply to this message

clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 10.11.2011 19:45, schrieb jhu:
> > clipka<ano### [at] anonymousorg>  wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Plus openEXR. Yes, that would be the job. Boost would be limited to
> >> boost_thread and boost_date_time; aside from those, we currently only
> >> use boost header-only libraries.
> >>
> >> zlib, jpeg, tiff and png libraries are already in the source tree (we
> >> just don't currently distribute them in the Linux version); boost and
> >> openEXR will be added to the code repository soon.
> >
> > So just put relevant source and respective directories into main source tree,
> > modify some scripts then? Sounds within my skill level.
>
> I guess we'd love to go for a makefile-based solution, rather than the
> BJam build tool the boost library comes with.
>
> It would probably also be nice to have an option to link against already
> installed versions of the libraries instead.
>
> I guess to pick up that glove you should contact Chris Cason. I'm sure
> your help will be appreciated.

How do I get in touch with him?

Post a reply to this message

Am 12.11.2011 05:26, schrieb jhu:
> clipka<ano### [at] anonymousorg>  wrote:
>>
>> I guess to pick up that glove you should contact Chris Cason. I'm sure
>> your help will be appreciated.
>
> How do I get in touch with him?

Try "team-coord-[three-letter month]-[four-digit year]@povray.org".

Post a reply to this message