 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"jr" <cre### [at] gmail com> wrote:
> ... typos ... </sigh> even missed out the cli options, sorry.
mkdir v${POV_RAY_FULL_VERSION}
( cd v${POV_RAY_FULL_VERSION} ; tar -xf ../$tarfile )
rm -f $tarfile
tar -cvf $tarfile v${POV_RAY_FULL_VERSION} && sync
gzip "${tarfile}"
rm -fr v${POV_RAY_FULL_VERSION}
regards, jr.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 11.07.2021 um 19:58 schrieb jr:
>>> downloaded the 'povunix' as recommended, was surprised the archive unpacks in
>>> the cwd rather than in a sub-directory.
>>
>> If you can help wrangling the `tar` and/or `gzip` command to rectify
>> that, I'd appreciate it.
...
> had not known '--anchored', interesting. I guess simplest would be just
> repacking, something like (any typos mine):
...
I think I've found something: Adding `--transform "s,^,FOO/,"` to the
parameters should do the job (for a suitable definition of `FOO`).
Requires GNU, but we don't need this to work on end-users' machines.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
hi,
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 11.07.2021 um 19:58 schrieb jr:
>
> >>> downloaded the 'povunix' as recommended, was surprised the archive unpacks in
> >>> the cwd rather than in a sub-directory.
> >>
> >> If you can help wrangling the `tar` and/or `gzip` command to rectify
> >> that, I'd appreciate it.
> ...
> > had not known '--anchored', interesting. I guess simplest would be just
> > repacking, something like (any typos mine):
> ...
>
> I think I've found something: Adding `--transform "s,^,FOO/,"` to the
> parameters should do the job (for a suitable definition of `FOO`).
works using 'sed'?! v nice. (will try and remember to explore this when
opportune)
regards, jr.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 12.07.2021 um 00:02 schrieb jr:
>> I think I've found something: Adding `--transform "s,^,FOO/,"` to the
>> parameters should do the job (for a suitable definition of `FOO`).
>
> works using 'sed'?! v nice. (will try and remember to explore this when
> opportune)
Not sure if it uses `sed` under the hood, but the syntax seems to be
`sed`-like, yes.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> It's official now:
>
> https://github.com/POV-Ray/povray/releases/tag/v3.8.0-beta.1
>
>
> A note to Unix users:
>
> We're now providing Unix-specific source code packages again. We
> recommend that you build from the `povunix-*.tar.gz` tarball, rather
> than the "Source code (tar.gz)" or "Source code (zip)" packages or the
> raw repo contents.
>
>
> A note to Windows XP users:
>
> Let us know if there are still any of you out there. Otherwise we'll
> presume that Vista (and higher) support should be enough for everybody.
>
>
> Happy Testing!
I could install and run the benchmark without any problems on two Linux
machines.
Thank you Clipka.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 12.07.2021 um 00:02 schrieb jr:
>
> >> I think I've found something ...
there was one other (small) thing, forgot to mention. during installation, if
another 3.8 version already exists, the old 'povray.{conf,ini}' files get
renamed to '*.bak' and new files are put in place. this has the disadvantage
that the existing povray no longer works as configured. the usual practice is
to leave existing files alone if found, and create the distributed as
'povray.{conf,ini}.new'; "admin" then integrates manually.
regards, jr.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 14.07.2021 um 11:34 schrieb jr:
> there was one other (small) thing, forgot to mention. during installation, if
> another 3.8 version already exists, the old 'povray.{conf,ini}' files get
> renamed to '*.bak' and new files are put in place. this has the disadvantage
> that the existing povray no longer works as configured. the usual practice is
> to leave existing files alone if found, and create the distributed as
> 'povray.{conf,ini}.new'; "admin" then integrates manually.
Can you please file an issue report on GitHub, to put a propoer pin in this?
I tend to lose track of stuff mentioned only on the newsgroups.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
hi,
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 14.07.2021 um 11:34 schrieb jr:
>
> > there was one other (small) thing, forgot to mention. during installation, if
> > another 3.8 version already exists, the old 'povray.{conf,ini}' files get
> > renamed to '*.bak' and new files are put in place. this has the disadvantage
> > that the existing povray no longer works as configured. the usual practice is
> > to leave existing files alone if found, and create the distributed as
> > 'povray.{conf,ini}.new'; "admin" then integrates manually.
>
> Can you please file an issue report on GitHub, to put a propoer pin in this?
went there, cannot add an "issue" without acquiring an account. sorry.
> I tend to lose track of stuff mentioned only on the newsgroups.
perhaps a "kind soul" with github membership followed this thread and will
create the report.
regards, jr.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 15.07.2021 um 16:14 schrieb jr:
>> Can you please file an issue report on GitHub, to put a propoer pin in this?
>
> went there, cannot add an "issue" without acquiring an account. sorry.
I'd argue that it's worth it, given that it's free of charge. It may not
be the last issue you might want to report.
GitHub _is_ our preferred place for bug reports these days.
And we're by far not the only ones. There is an ever growing number of
other pieces of open source software out there that have GitHub as their
_only_ official channel for bug reporting. Having a GitHub account opens
up the door to those, too.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
hi,
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 15.07.2021 um 16:14 schrieb jr:
>
> >> Can you please file an issue report on GitHub, to put a propoer pin in this?
> >
> > went there, cannot add an "issue" without acquiring an account. sorry.
>
> I'd argue that it's worth it, given that it's free of charge. It may not
> be the last issue you might want to report.
I'm sure that people like you, self-confessed "Windows jockeys" that is, find
the environment .. conducive to your working. a bit like Linux distributions,
some people find Ubuntu/Debian "floats their boat".
fwiw, the 'github.com/POV-Ray/povray/tags' page would benefit from showing
checksums (sha256?) for the archives, too.
> GitHub _is_ our preferred place for bug reports these days.
sure. (though regrettable from my perspective) as long as no account is needed
to download the source archive.
> And we're by far not the only ones. There is an ever growing number of
> other pieces of open source software ...
the "not the only ones" argument reminds me of an old saying "people, eat more
shit, four billion flies can't be wrong". fifteen or twenty years ago,
SourceForge was the place to be (seen) on, maybe github will do better, who
knows?
regards, jr.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
