 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Has anyone managed to use WINE to run the Windows version of POV-Ray 3.5
under Linux? I've tried, but it appears to freeze while showing the
splashscreen.
--
Mark
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Sebastian H
Subject: Re: WINE and POV 3.5 for Windows
Date: 21 Jul 2002 06:25:47
Message: <3D3A8CD0.10406@web.de>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mark Wagner schrieb:
> Has anyone managed to use WINE to run the Windows version of POV-Ray 3.5
> under Linux? I've tried, but it appears to freeze while showing the
> splashscreen.
>
This is surely a nice experiment, but why?
Sebastian H.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 21 Jul 2002 06:28:32 -0400, Sebastian H. quoth:
> Mark Wagner schrieb:
>> Has anyone managed to use WINE to run the Windows version of POV-Ray
>> 3.5 under Linux? I've tried, but it appears to freeze while showing
>> the splashscreen.
>>
>>
> This is surely a nice experiment, but why?
For the sake of doing it.
--
Mark
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 02:22:04 -0400, Mark Wagner quoth:
> On Sun, 21 Jul 2002 06:28:32 -0400, Sebastian H. quoth:
>
>> Mark Wagner schrieb:
>>> Has anyone managed to use WINE to run the Windows version of POV-Ray
>>> 3.5 under Linux? I've tried, but it appears to freeze while showing
>>> the splashscreen.
>>>
>>>
>> This is surely a nice experiment, but why?
>
> For the sake of doing it.
Additionally, a quick run of Skyvase using the Linux and Windows versions
indicates that the relatively unoptimized Linux version takes about three
times as long as the optimized Windows version does to render Skyvase.
--
Mark
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mark Wagner wrote:
> Additionally, a quick run of Skyvase using the Linux and Windows
> versions indicates that the relatively unoptimized Linux version
> takes about three times as long as the optimized Windows version does
> to render Skyvase.
Now imagine that kind of optomisation accross your entire system, and you
wonder why people say Linux chuggs
--
Rick
Kitty5 WebDesign - http://Kitty5.com
POV-Ray News & Resources - http://Povray.co.uk
TEL : +44 (01270) 501101 - FAX : +44 (01270) 251105 - ICQ : 15776037
PGP Public Key
http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x231E1CEA
---
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.377 / Virus Database: 211 - Release Date: 15/07/2002
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Jaime Vives Piqueres
Subject: Re: WINE and POV 3.5 for Windows
Date: 23 Jul 2002 07:30:15
Message: <3d3d3e47@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mark Wagner wrote:
> Has anyone managed to use WINE to run the Windows version of POV-Ray 3.5
> under Linux? I've tried, but it appears to freeze while showing the
> splashscreen.
I just tried it out... it runs if you use /NR. But you must also disable
the editor as it causes "segmentation fault". Then use "Select file and
render" (Alt+S). The problem is that it's even slower than the Linux
version...
--
Jaime Vives Piqueres
La Persistencia de la Ignorancia
http://www.ignorancia.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Additionally, a quick run of Skyvase using the Linux and Windows versions
> indicates that the relatively unoptimized Linux version takes about three
> times as long as the optimized Windows version does to render Skyvase.
>
I don't know very much about optimization but why aren't there optimized
Linux versions?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mark Wagner wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 02:22:04 -0400, Mark Wagner quoth:
>
> Additionally, a quick run of Skyvase using the Linux and Windows versions
> indicates that the relatively unoptimized Linux version takes about three
> times as long as the optimized Windows version does to render Skyvase.
>
I'm looking forward to compiling the 3.5 source code once it's
available. In prior versions, 3.1 and MegaPov 0.7, I had much faster
render times in Linux using my own optimized compiliation than in the
pre-compiled Windows version.
It'll be interesting to see how they'll compare in 3.5 since I get the
impression some good optimization went into the pre-compiled Windows
binary. I'll post results once I have them ;)
-Roz
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
