 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hiya,
Following some discussions about patching the povray source
code, I'm just wondering why the source tree is not common to all
architectures ? That is, there would be the generic, platform-independent
source files in e.g. the main source directory, and all other unix/
mac/ windows/ dos/ amiga/ etc.../ would be provided as well.
I suppose the subdivision was initially meant to be a bandwith
saving trick, but it does make things harder to maintain, doesn't it ?
Especially in the context of patching and/or public repositery (if any).
Is bandwith for a (efficiently compressed) source tree as important as
the one devoted to binary distributions ? I don't think the extra files
would take so much space or bandwith. However I'm maybe wrong since I
never downloaded anything but the unix/linux source files...
Just a stupid question actually :o)
And sorry if another "moron" already asked for it before ;oppp
- NC
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Calimet wrote:
>
> Hiya,
>
> Following some discussions about patching the povray source
> code, I'm just wondering why the source tree is not common to all
> architectures ? That is, there would be the generic, platform-independent
> source files in e.g. the main source directory, and all other unix/
> mac/ windows/ dos/ amiga/ etc.../ would be provided as well.
I'm not sure what you are talking about. Of course the official (non
public) source repository contains the source for all platforms. But the
source packages only contain the files needed for one platform of course.
Do you suggest there should be an official complete source package with
the platform specific files of all platforms?
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 31 Dec. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3E4ABDE6.72854ADC@gmx.de> , Christoph Hormann
<chr### [at] gmx de> wrote:
> Do you suggest there should be an official complete source package with
> the platform specific files of all platforms?
If that is indeed the suggestion, it wouldn't work because certain platform
require files in a certain format (line-endings, multiple forks, etc) that
would not be portable anyway.
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Of course the official (non
> public) source repository contains the source for all platforms.
I would be very surprised otherwise :-)
> Do you suggest there should be an official complete source package with
> the platform specific files of all platforms?
Yes, this is exactly what I meant. Unified source. No redundancy.
Archive provided in different formats (zip, rar, tar.gz, tar.bz2, ...)
instead of platform-specific. Same filename for all as a big advantage :o)
In one word: consistency
(here I'm not talking about the povray internal code, just how
it is provided with respect to platform-specificity).
For instance I note that povwin-3.5 contains source for all the
supporting library (zlib, png, tiff, jpeg) while others (unix) don't.
- NC
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> If that is indeed the suggestion, it wouldn't work because certain platform
> require files in a certain format (line-endings, multiple forks, etc) that
> would not be portable anyway.
Not if you provide the source in different archive formats (see my answer
to Christoph): zip AND tar.gz for instance.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Johan De Messemaeker
Subject: Re: A common povray source tree ?
Date: 12 Feb 2003 20:07:43
Message: <3e4aefde@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Calimet wrote:
> For instance I note that povwin-3.5 contains source for all the
> supporting library (zlib, png, tiff, jpeg) while others (unix) don't.
I don't see the point in doing this. Most Linux distributions install these
libraries by default. If not, there are most of the time easy install
possibilities (emerge on Gentoo, RPM on Redhat and Mandrake, deb on Debian
...). In many cases are these default installation tuned so that the
libraries play nicely with other parts of the system (for example: Qt).
OpenBSD, NetBSD and FreeBSD have similar capabilities. Dito for Solaris.
Regards, Johan
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Johan De Messemaeker wrote:
> Nicolas Calimet wrote:
>
>> For instance I note that povwin-3.5 contains source for all the
>> supporting library (zlib, png, tiff, jpeg) while others (unix) don't.
>
> I don't see the point in doing this. Most Linux distributions install
> these libraries by default.
If I understand Nicolas' intention correctly, the point is that he wants
a unified archive, so that everything is included for every platform.
As a result person A can write a patched version of - say - Linux
and person B can compile it on Windows -- hopefully without fiddling
in the sources.
As for the libraries I agree with you. They do not really belong to
the source code of povray. I would suggest to move them outside the povray
package and provide separate archives.
However, as the POV-Team does not support an open development, things
like that are unlikely to happen.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3E4### [at] freefr> , Nicolas Calimet <pov### [at] freefr>
wrote:
>> If that is indeed the suggestion, it wouldn't work because certain platform
>> require files in a certain format (line-endings, multiple forks, etc) that
>> would not be portable anyway.
>
> Not if you provide the source in different archive formats (see my answer
> to Christoph): zip AND tar.gz for instance.
But that still renders sources archived with some formats unusabled on some
platforms. Thus it doesn't make any sense.
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Calimet wrote:
>
> > Do you suggest there should be an official complete source package with
> > the platform specific files of all platforms?
>
> Yes, this is exactly what I meant. Unified source. No redundancy.
> Archive provided in different formats (zip, rar, tar.gz, tar.bz2, ...)
> instead of platform-specific. Same filename for all as a big advantage :o)
No. As Thorsten explained this would not work because the file formats
are not platform independent. The whole thing would result in one archive
for each platform again, the only difference would be that it would
contain a lot of files not needed for the user.
I don't really see the advantage - what would you gain by having for
example all the mac specific files on a unix machine. You can't use them.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 31 Dec. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 13 Feb 2003 11:26:40 +0100, Thomas Willhalm
<tho### [at] uni-konstanzde> wrote:
> If I understand Nicolas' intention correctly, the point is that he wants
> a unified archive, so that everything is included for every platform.
> As a result person A can write a patched version of - say - Linux
> and person B can compile it on Windows -- hopefully without fiddling
> in the sources.
The MegaPOV core was taken from windows core code and is succesfully compiled
with all supported platforms, so does POV really not work the way you want ?
I'm already tried compilation of Sources with many compilers in a few
platforms and I can group changes as follow:
- playing with compiler/linker settings
- playing with warnings
- playing with bugs and limitations in compiler
- playing with settings from config.h
- adding additional header files
Usually none of those changes can be predicted by programing with different
compiler on different platform so changes usually still require platform
specific fiddling. But it is not difficult work when such project like
http://megapov.inetart.net/manual/internals.html is started. For the next
MegaPOV this chapter will be probably updated with some more info about
Digital Mars C++ (imo fastest compilation and easiest installation I meet with
community and development somehow similiar to POV), recently released final
OpenWatcom 1.0 (I really interested how it will work) and (if I will be able
to setup MacOS 8.6 and MPW) MrCpp compiler. Please note this work is rather
more general and it can be applied to any patched releases and is mostly not
connected with source core code shape itself.
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
