 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi all,
I'm currently using 3.7.0 RC7, and have run across some problems which
appear to be manifestations of http://bugs.povray.org/task/294 ..
The bug entry says that a fix has been developed (about a month ago) and
applied as "change 5907". Is there a repository somewhere (or nightlies
or something) I could fetch from to pick up this fix? (I've looked around
a bit, but can't seem to find any source repository for POV-Ray out
there.. am I missing something obvious?)
Also, it's a little unclear: The bug is still listed as "Requires
testing" status (I'd be happy to help test, if needed).. will this fix
make it into the next release (whenever that might be)? This issue is
really quite annoying and difficult to work around..
--alex
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 12/07/2013 20:24, Alex Stewart nous fit lire :
> Hi all,
>
> I'm currently using 3.7.0 RC7, and have run across some problems which
> appear to be manifestations of http://bugs.povray.org/task/294 ..
>
> The bug entry says that a fix has been developed (about a month ago) and
> applied as "change 5907". Is there a repository somewhere (or nightlies
> or something) I could fetch from to pick up this fix? (I've looked around
> a bit, but can't seem to find any source repository for POV-Ray out
> there.. am I missing something obvious?)
>
You are not missing anything. Hereafter change 5907 for your own test
(by hand)
Change in source/backend/frame.h
================================
1. circa line 1080, put in comment:
> bool Cache_Valid;
> int Cache_Type;
> DBL Cache_Point;
> EXPRESS Cache_Data;
Changes in source/backend/math/splines.cpp
==========================================
1. circa line 542 inside Create_Spline, put in comment:
> New->Cache_Valid = false;
2. circa line 598 inside Copy_Spline, put in comment:
> New->Cache_Valid = false;
3. circa line 705 inside Insert_Spline_Entry, put in comment:
> sp->Cache_Valid = false;
4. circa line 802, put in comment (about 16 lines):
> // check if the value is in the cache
> if((sp->Cache_Point == p) && (sp->Cache_Type == sp->Type))
> {
> if(sp->Cache_Valid == true) // doing this here is more efficient as it is rarely
false [trf]
> {
> Assign_Express(v, sp->Cache_Data);
> return sp->Cache_Data[0];
> }
> }
>
> // init some cache data
> sp->Cache_Valid = false;
> sp->Cache_Type = sp->Type;
> sp->Cache_Point = p;
5. circa line 902, put in comment (about 2 lines):
> // put data in cache
> Assign_Express(sp->Cache_Data, v);
> sp->Cache_Valid = true;
> Also, it's a little unclear: The bug is still listed as "Requires
> testing" status (I'd be happy to help test, if needed).. will this fix
> make it into the next release (whenever that might be)? This issue is
> really quite annoying and difficult to work around..
It requires testing because I was alone to test it, and my hardware is
not universal, so confirmation by other would be welcome. From strict
quality point of view, the patcher should not close directly the issue.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Alex Stewart
Subject: Re: How to get fix for FS#294? - "povray_5907.patch" yEnc
Date: 12 Jul 2013 20:18:10
Message: <51e09cc2@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download '=ybegin part=1 line=128 size=2069 name=povray_5907.patch.txt' (1 KB)
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 12 Jul 2013 22:14:44 +0200, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> You are not missing anything. Hereafter change 5907 for your own test
> (by hand)
[...]
Thanks! The specified changes fix my problem completely. Everything's
rendering properly now!
Attached is the change as a patch against RC7 in case anybody else wants
to try it (can be applied using 'patch -p1 < povray_5907.patch' prior to
configure/make)..
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 07/12/2013 04:14 PM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> Le 12/07/2013 20:24, Alex Stewart nous fit lire :
...
>
> It requires testing because I was alone to test it, and my hardware is
> not universal, so confirmation by other would be welcome. From strict
> quality point of view, the patcher should not close directly the issue.
>
For what it is worth testing wise, I've been running with patched code
since getting your emails from the bug tracking system. Though I was
lazy in that all I did code wise was comment any setting of "Cache_Valid
= true;". In roughly a month I have not seen any issue, but my only use
of splines in that time has been in isosurfaces.
Bill P.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 13-07-12 20:18, Alex Stewart a écrit :
> On Fri, 12 Jul 2013 22:14:44 +0200, Le_Forgeron wrote:
>> You are not missing anything. Hereafter change 5907 for your own test
>> (by hand)
> [...]
>
> Thanks! The specified changes fix my problem completely. Everything's
> rendering properly now!
>
> Attached is the change as a patch against RC7 in case anybody else wants
> to try it (can be applied using 'patch -p1 < povray_5907.patch' prior to
> configure/make)..
>
Sory, but this forum don't support attachments. Use the binaries variety
for that purpose.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 12.07.2013 20:24, schrieb Alex Stewart:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm currently using 3.7.0 RC7, and have run across some problems which
> appear to be manifestations of http://bugs.povray.org/task/294 ..
>
> The bug entry says that a fix has been developed (about a month ago) and
> applied as "change 5907". Is there a repository somewhere (or nightlies
> or something) I could fetch from to pick up this fix? (I've looked around
> a bit, but can't seem to find any source repository for POV-Ray out
> there.. am I missing something obvious?)
POV-Ray is not (yet) part of the world of free(TM) software (as in Free
Software Foundation), and accordingly doesn't have the infrastructure
commonly associated with free(TM) software, such as a public repository.
There does exist a Perforce repository, but it's accessible for dev team
members only.
(There is a strong commitment to change both though: POV-Ray is on its
way towards GPL, and a publicly available Git repository is also on the
roadmap.)
> Also, it's a little unclear: The bug is still listed as "Requires
> testing" status (I'd be happy to help test, if needed).. will this fix
> make it into the next release (whenever that might be)?
Most likely so.
As for the "requires testing" status, we commonly set bugtracker entries
to that once the changes have been submitted to the codebase, and leave
them at that state until the change has been released and user feedback
been received, or a reasonable time has elapsed after release without
any feedback. Well, maybe we should change that a bit.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
