 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hey, another Slackhead around! Glad to know. :-)
Linux (Slackware 9) and
FreeBSD 4.8/5.1
POV-Ray 3.1 through 3.5
4 years (on Unix, more on DOS/Windows)
> Slackware 9
> POV-Ray 3.5
> about 3 weeks
>
> -Shay
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Redhat 9 here. POV-Ray 3.5 and Megapov... about 6 months :)
George
> Hey, another Slackhead around! Glad to know. :-)
>
> Linux (Slackware 9) and
> FreeBSD 4.8/5.1
>
> POV-Ray 3.1 through 3.5
> 4 years (on Unix, more on DOS/Windows)
>
>> Slackware 9
>> POV-Ray 3.5
>> about 3 weeks
>>
>> -Shay
>
>
>
--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Roberto A." <wol### [at] hot-mail com> wrote in message
news:3f5e39b2@news.povray.org...
| Hey, another Slackhead around! Glad to know. :-)
|
Hey, out of curiosity, have you tried to use pov-mode for Emacs 21.2? I
think that there's a conflict and would like to report that to the
authors, but it would be nice to have some confirmation. The problem
I've encountered is described in the 'Emacs pov-mode problem' thread.
Thanks,
-Shay
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gentoo 1.4, pov3.5, about 2 weeks :)
--
Rick
Kitty5 NewMedia http://Kitty5.com
POV-Ray News & Resources http://Povray.co.uk
TEL : +44 (01270) 501101 - ICQ : 15776037
PGP Public Key
http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x231E1CEA
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken wrote:
> Hi,
>
3.1g homebrew Linux 2.2.x gcc 2.95 486dx33
3.5 Redhat 2.4.16 gcc 2.96 pII 433
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde> writes:
> > This information will be used to help better
> > support this platform.
>
> Great. An official RPM would probably be a good idea although a lot of
> Linux distributions already include a version (SuSE seems to ship 3.5
> since version 8.1).
I doubt this is possible. Different distributions still have widely
different perceptions of where to place things and will support
different version of the image libraries. For one thing, RPM isn't
even used by all distributions.
--
Ole Laursen
http://www.cs.auc.dk/~olau/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ole Laursen wrote:
>> Great. An official RPM would probably be a good idea although a lot of
>> Linux distributions already include a version (SuSE seems to ship 3.5
>> since version 8.1).
>
> I doubt this is possible. Different distributions still have widely
> different perceptions of where to place things and will support
> different version of the image libraries.
An RPM based distribution *is* a good idea. Most major Linux distributions
are LSB compliant now and POV-Rays binary structure is not very complicated
so it shouldn't be a problem to install it on most Linux boxes. Regarding
the libraries - the RPM system will resolve all dependencies, so I can't
see any issues here.
> For one thing, RPM isn't even used by all distributions.
Right, but you'll find it on nearly all distributions, even on Debian.
Regards,
Andreas
--
http://www.render-zone.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Andreas Kreisig <and### [at] gmxde> writes:
> An RPM based distribution *is* a good idea. Most major Linux distributions
> are LSB compliant now and POV-Rays binary structure is not very complicated
> so it shouldn't be a problem to install it on most Linux boxes. Regarding
> the libraries - the RPM system will resolve all dependencies, so I can't
> see any issues here.
The problem is not just the binaries. The problem is also where to
place the include files, the reference documentation, the examples,
the .ini files etc.
RPM can't help you if you don't have the right version of a library.
At most it will bark and stop. And I don't think you can mix RPMs from
different vendors without trouble.
> > For one thing, RPM isn't even used by all distributions.
>
> Right, but you'll find it on nearly all distributions, even on Debian.
While it is true that you can install RPMs in Debian too if you
install alien, I doubt anyone is going to do that as long as there is
a maintained Debian package which does the Right Thing for Debian.
It is not that I think having povray.org binaries is per se a bad
idea, but I think it might be harder than it appears and difficult to
get right. And most distributions seem to package it themselves anyway
(at least Debian, SuSE, Red Hat).
--
Ole Laursen
http://www.cs.auc.dk/~olau/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ole Laursen wrote:
> It is not that I think having povray.org binaries is per se a bad
> idea, but I think it might be harder than it appears and difficult to
> get right. And most distributions seem to package it themselves anyway
> (at least Debian, SuSE, Red Hat).
It's also in the Gentoo portage tree so they're trying to maintain a
distribution of it as well.
-Roz
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ole Laursen wrote:
> The problem is not just the binaries. The problem is also where to
> place the include files, the reference documentation, the examples,
> the .ini files etc.
I would recomend to use the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard, explained on
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/ As far as I know most of the latest
distributions are compliant so I don't see a lot of problems.
> RPM can't help you if you don't have the right version of a library.
> At most it will bark and stop. And I don't think you can mix RPMs from
> different vendors without trouble.
Yes it will stop and tell you the missing package so that you can install
it. Mixing RPMs should make no trouble in most cases. I sometimes install
RedHat RPMs on my SuSE box without any problems. And actually you don't
need to mix libs from different vendors because most distributions are very
complete.
>> > For one thing, RPM isn't even used by all distributions.
>>
>> Right, but you'll find it on nearly all distributions, even on Debian.
>
> While it is true that you can install RPMs in Debian too if you
> install alien, I doubt anyone is going to do that as long as there is
> a maintained Debian package which does the Right Thing for Debian.
Alien is just a converter wich is able to convert between RPM, DEB etc. and
vice versa. And this could allready be a solution. But I'm sure there are
lots of Debian users out there who are willing to build a Debian package.
And you could install the whole RPM system on a Debian box but I assume
that nobody will do that ... :)
> It is not that I think having povray.org binaries is per se a bad
> idea, but I think it might be harder than it appears and difficult to
> get right. And most distributions seem to package it themselves anyway
> (at least Debian, SuSE, Red Hat).
Of course you cannot include all possible distributions or even self made
systems but it should be able to take the major ones into account. And when
everything is going wrong, you can still use the old method.
Regards,
Andreas
--
http://www.render-zone.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
