 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 01/11/2017 01:59 AM, clipka wrote:
> POV-Ray 3.7.1 has now officially entered public beta testing phase.
> Source code and Windows binaries are available on GitHub:
>
> https://github.com/POV-Ray/povray/releases/tag/v3.7.1-beta.2
The file README.unix seems to be intended for POV-Ray 3.6.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2017-01-11 11:37 AM (-4), clipka wrote:
> Am 11.01.2017 um 15:50 schrieb LanuHum:
>> Does not work! Linux Mageia 5 :(
>> [snip]
>>
>> Error in `/usr/bin/povray': free(): invalid next size (fast): 0x00007f2ff0017120
>> ***
>> ======= Backtrace: =========
>> /lib64/libc.so.6(+0x7238e)[0x7f30092d638e]
>> /lib64/libc.so.6(+0x7a0c8)[0x7f30092de0c8]
>> /lib64/libc.so.6(cfree+0x48)[0x7f30092e1798]
>> /usr/bin/povray[0x5ae899]
>> /usr/bin/povray[0x5af82a]
>> /usr/bin/povray[0x5b3d93]
>> /usr/bin/povray[0x5b817c]
>> /usr/bin/povray[0x5b4df5]
>> /usr/bin/povray[0x58f4a8]
>> /usr/bin/povray[0x58fd3c]
>> /usr/bin/povray[0x5125e5]
>> /lib64/libboost_thread.so.1.55.0(+0xde9a)[0x7f300a052e9a]
>> /lib64/libpthread.so.0(+0x75bd)[0x7f300ada35bd]
>> /lib64/libc.so.6(clone+0x6d)[0x7f300935b62d]
I'm having the same trouble, though with different addresses. (I am not
getting any of the extraneous clutter that LanuHum posted, though.)
> Also, I presume you're running POV-Ray from your Blender exporter. May I
> suggest that you first try whether your build of 3.7.1-beta.2 runs
> properly "stand-alone?"
>
> If POV-Ray runs properly "stand-alone" with one of the provided sample
> scenes, the next step would be to write the Blender export to a file,
> and render that file by invoking POV-Ray "stand-alone".
I'm running it stand-alone.
> If that fails, please provide us with the corresponding scene file, so
> we can try to reproduce the problem on a Windows version, where we have
> more debugging aids at our disposal.
So far, it works for me on simple scenes, and crashes on complex files.
I'll see if I can reproduce it with a scene that doesn't require posting
half my library.
My distro is openSUSE 13.2.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2017-01-11 01:42 PM (-4), clipka wrote:
> Am 11.01.2017 um 17:09 schrieb LanuHum:
>
>> I have another computer. AMD (1 kernel,1 thread) Povray has not been set. It was
>> the first compilation.
>> ...../configure --prefix=/usr COMPILED_BY=Lanuhum no problem
>> make no problem
>> make install no problem
>> run povray - problem
>
> BTW, did you try "make check" before "make install"?
>
> That should give an indication whether the problem is with the binary
> itself, or with how it gets installed.
The cookies look delicious, but as I posted elsewhere, the installed
binary does work for some scenes.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2017-01-11 01:36 PM (-4), clipka wrote:
> It would be interesting to know whether the latest tagged alpha
> (v3.7.1-alpha.8927145) works better than the beta. Since we've made only
> very few changes to the source code since then, that would give us a
> clear hint where to search for things that might be going wrong.
GitHub still confuses me to no end. My latest alpha is 8917471, but
when I feel my way around GitHub, I cannot find any alpha version later
than 8737777.
8917471 works fine for me.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2017-02-01 05:57 PM (-4), Cousin Ricky wrote:
> On 2017-01-11 01:36 PM (-4), clipka wrote:
>> It would be interesting to know whether the latest tagged alpha
>> (v3.7.1-alpha.8927145) works better than the beta. Since we've made only
>> very few changes to the source code since then, that would give us a
>> clear hint where to search for things that might be going wrong.
>
> GitHub still confuses me to no end. My latest alpha is 8917471, but
> when I feel my way around GitHub, I cannot find any alpha version later
> than 8737777.
I just found 8927145.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2017-01-11 01:36 PM (-4), clipka wrote:
> It would be interesting to know whether the latest tagged alpha
> (v3.7.1-alpha.8927145) works better than the beta. Since we've made only
> very few changes to the source code since then, that would give us a
> clear hint where to search for things that might be going wrong.
Alpha.8927145 crashes. Alpha.8917471 runs splendidly.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2017-01-11 01:59 AM (-4), clipka wrote:
> POV-Ray 3.7.1 has now officially entered public beta testing phase.
> Source code and Windows binaries are available on GitHub:
>
> https://github.com/POV-Ray/povray/releases/tag/v3.7.1-beta.2
>
> (beta.1 was an internal release only.)
>
> The beta version is designed to install in its own dedicated directory,
> and live happily alongside an existing 3.7 installation.
>
> Happy testing!
The parser chokes on .ini files that are not in the current directory,
but are in the library path.
I wish I could say in what manner it choked, but the message was that
infuriatingly unspecific:
Problem with option setting
[Command line is echoed here.]
Failed to parse command-line option
Once again, if the parser had given a more helpful message, I could have
saved nearly an hour and a half figuring out what went wrong. I've been
complaining about this for five or six years now. PLEASE FIX THIS!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2017-01-11 11:37 AM (-4), clipka wrote:
> If that fails, please provide us with the corresponding scene file, so
> we can try to reproduce the problem on a Windows version, where we have
> more debugging aids at our disposal.
The very first two scenes I tried failed in the same manner that
LanuHum's scene did. (They also failed with alpha.8927145.) Since
then, all of the scenes I've tried have rendered successfully.
Unfortunately, both of those first two scenes use an include file that
is more than 1 megabyte.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2017-01-11 11:37 AM (-4), clipka wrote:
> Those addresses are of no help to us whatsoever. You'd have to compile
> POV-Ray in a manner that the backtrace spits out function names and/or
> file names and line numbers.
Oh, I forgot to add: -version reports the compiler settings as:
Compilation settings:
Build architecture: x86_64-suse-linux-gnu
Built/Optimized for: x86_64-suse-linux-gnu (using -march=native)
Compiler vendor: gnu
Compiler version: g++ 4.8
Compiler flags: -pipe -Wno-multichar -Wno-write-strings
-fno-enforce-eh-specs -Wno-non-template-friend -s -O3 -ffast-math
-march=native -pthread
I don't know how to change the build scripts to include debugging
information.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 02/01/2017 07:49 PM, Cousin Ricky wrote:
> On 2017-01-11 11:37 AM (-4), clipka wrote:
>> If that fails, please provide us with the corresponding scene file, so
>> we can try to reproduce the problem on a Windows version, where we have
>> more debugging aids at our disposal.
>
> The very first two scenes I tried failed in the same manner that
> LanuHum's scene did. (They also failed with alpha.8927145.) Since
> then, all of the scenes I've tried have rendered successfully.
>
> Unfortunately, both of those first two scenes use an include file that
> is more than 1 megabyte.
Those first two scenes did not actually use the data in the 1 megabyte
file, so I dropped it, concatenated everything else into a single file,
then took a hatchet to the file.
Guess what? The one thing those two scenes had in common that all my
other tests did not was Greek text.
This appears to be the same charset utf8 bug that ThH uncovered. And
since LanuHum probably uses a lot of Cyrillic text, I'm guessing that
his is the same problem.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
